Slashdot Mirror
360 vs. PS3 vs. Wii - The Designer's Perspective
Gamasutra is running a piece today written by Ernest Adams, a frequent contributor to the site and an amusingly opinionated game designer. He writes to weigh in on the console war debate from the perspective of a game designer. He runs down the usual list of pros and cons for each machine, and then digs into the most creative aspects of each machine. Finally, lays out what he sees as the end result of this hardware generation: "So who, at the end of the day, will be the also-ran in this generation of consoles? On the global scale, I'd say it could well be neither the PS3 or the Wii, but the Xbox 360. The PS3 will win over the hardcore gamers who have to have the fastest, most amazing machine available. The Wii will skim off the younger players and those who don't have as much money to spend. Both have the advantage of being made in Japan, so they'll crowd the Xbox right out of that market. In the US and Europe, it's harder to say, but I see the Xbox's early start as more of a liability than a benefit."
"So who, at the end of the day, will be the also-ran in this generation of consoles? On the global scale, I'd say it could well be neither the PS3 or the Wii, but the Xbox 360. The PS3 will win over the hardcore gamers who have to have the fastest, most amazing machine available. The Wii will skim off the younger players and those who don't have as much money to spend. Both have the advantage of being made in Japan, so they'll crowd the Xbox right out of that market. In the US and Europe, it's harder to say, but I see the Xbox's early start as more of a liability than a benefit."
I don't know what will happen in total sales, but I expect that the so-called "Hardcore" gamer will likely purchase multiple systems and will be very attracted to the Wii because the nature of the titles it recieves; what I mean is that many of the so-called "Hardcore" gamers will buy pretty much any piece of hardware that has enough exclusive games, and pretty much all Wii games are exclusive due to the nature of the console.
The majority of gamers are not hard-core and are no where near as big of graphics whores as some people assume; gaming is probably not their only form of entertainment so they're probably less likely to spend too much money on it. The price of the Wii is probably very attractive to them, but they also haven't played enough games to care about how stagnant the industry has become.
...that the XBox360 might be good middle ground for many people, and would thus do quite well in relation to the other two? Don't get me wrong, I wish I had all three, and maybe for now I'd be happy with a Wii. But an XBox360 isn't that much more, and can do much the same stuff as PS3. Maybe it will come down to killer games, and Halo3 will help out a lot there. Wii's got its own fan base... With all the launch glitches from Sony, and recent evidence that they want even higher priced, PS3-based home entertainment systems, makes me think that as gaming consoles go, PS3 may end up the lose. My 2cents.
There are actual console developers with insight into the race between the PS3 and Wii, the problem is that anyone with an actual worthwhile knowledge is too busy actually making games.
...
So instead we get the worthless ramblings of the console dev world's deadweight:
'game designers' aka level monkeys
producers
testers
because the Phantom will destroy all the consoles in the end!
I think it is interesting that everyone seems to be assuming that the fight for first/second is between the Wii and whichever of the other two win out. In the article above as well as the other slashdot comments already posted there is a base assumption that the Wii is going to do quite well. It is as if everyone is acknowledging that the Wii already has a certain segment of the market sewn up and that gives the advantage in the three way battle for the rest of it. Now, that could be completely wrong, but I think it is very interesting to see that unspoken assumption in so much of what I read.
This article is useless rhetoric about the "console wars". At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who has the best graphics or the best kind of control system. What matters is what you like to play, and which console will give you that. The people who want to play the games that only the PS3 offers will buy the PS3, regardless of what Nintendo and Microsoft do, and vice-versa. There will never be a winner to the "console wars", and thus ample opportunity for people to rehash the good and the bad of all of the systems to try and make it sound like a new angle, when they're really just kicking a dead horse.
Nintendo's edge can vanish in a flash if either sony, xbox, introduces a wii mote of thier own. Then Nintendo has the weakest machine and no input device advantage. Thus Nintendo's remianing advantage will be two fold.
1) the early sales lead gives then a critical market size where developers are willing to write for the wii-mote
2) ubiquity of the controller: if the controller is just an add-on for sony and xbox and not in every home then designers wont' design games thet require it.
I'd assume the controller would add atleast $50 to the cost of a sony or xbox so bundling in every system might not work at their present price point unless its a loss leader for the game sales.
The nice thing for nintendo is that they won't have to plow money into game development to sell their platform. Xbox and sony will live r die on who produces the finest collection of games the earliest. Wii finesses that battle. Just build the remote and the games will come.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Or the gamers who, you know, like to have more than 3 games a year and care about more than Halo. It's not like the prices are going to stay fixed forever, and I know kids who have, on their own earnings, bought all three last-gen consoles.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
The Wise Muse hereby predicts a return to the 8-bit Nintendo: the game selection is large and the console is cheap.
The Wii appears to have one fundamental problem now that I've been around multiple people who have the system, including myself. The novelty wears off pretty quickly. For some people it takes only a few minutes, for others maybe a couple of weeks. But it seems like everyone has a moment where the Wii goes from 'amazing and revolutionary system with a controller that has unlimited possibilities' to 'eh, just a GameCube with a pointer for a controller that doesn't really work very well for most games'.
With games that look like this:
http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/movie/d483.html
already on the PS3(free playable demo just released this week), after the holidays the Wii is going to have a hard time keeping up sales - especially when you look at how bleak the release schedule is for the system in 2007. Right now I am looking at nothing worth buying for my Wii until at least March and maybe later.
I still can't see any way the ps3 can come out on top on this one. As a designer my self I see nothing but frustration with the ps3 as a development platform. And I believe price point is still an important factor in people's decision when they buy a console. As the lower common denominator out of the two the Xbox has the advantage of art assets being created for it's limitations, and being ported to ps3 for most popular cross platform games. This not only lessens ps3 graphical advantages but gets developers more familiar with the 360 itself. Sony's advantages are with it's exclusive titles, loyal fan base and its marketing, but I see more an more people becoming bitter from Sony jamming half assed stuff down everybody's throats. If Sony does succeed in this generation I think it will only serve to reinforce their hubris, setting them up for a failure next generation.
From the Article would be:
"So which do I want to design for? From a creativity standpoint, it's the Wii, hands down (or up!). "
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
You mean... a Slashdot contributor is predicting that the Microsoft product will be the biggest failure?
Man, I didn't see THAT coming.
Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
So, I've been kicking around the idea of getting a 360 for months, now. I was close, but put off by the sticker shock, and decided to hold off for a bit longer. Maybe until a price drop.
A couple days ago, though, I went over to a friend's place; she manages a small EBgames store, and has a 360 and just about every notable game for it. It was just a small get-together, so a bunch of us spent some time browsing through her collection of 360 games. I'm glad I didn't buy one.
Gears of War. Rainbow 6: Vegas. Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter. FEAR. YAWW2FPS (Call of Duty something, I think). Dead Rising. Saint's Row. Splinter Cell: Double Agent. Dead or Alive 4.
Incidentally, most of these games are the most popular on the 360. Notice something? It's almost entirely FPS. R6:V, CoD and GRAW are your archetypical boring, generic, sequel shovelware. Gears of War and FEAR are both good games in their own right, but considering the company they're in, they don't exactly stand out. Then you have yet another Splinter Cell game, which falls in the same boat: a good game, but reeking of been-there-done-that. Next is Dead Rising, a good game with a few very, very deep flaws, but basically fun, and Dead or Alive 4: an uninspired button-masher fighter that doesn't look like its had its sprites updated in years. Nevermind that the game ought to come with a jar of vaseline, as it's mainly beat-off material for teenagers.
It's not that the 360's game lineup is all that bad, it's just that the console's been out for a year now, and the best game on it is a FPS, on a console that's drowning in FPSes. Yet where are the RPGs? Oblivion and its broken leveling system and litany of cut-and-paste caves/dungeons? Bottom-of-the-JRPG barrel drek like Enchanted Arms (if you're not acquainted with how agonizingly bad this game is, take a look at some of the gameplay videos on Gametrailers)?
If the 360 really has a weakness, its the utter lack of diversity in its games. It's a hell of generic sequelism. That's fine in a launch console, but not a year after release.
While the race between the Wii and PS3 is not obvious right now as to who will come out on top, it is safe to say the 360 is no longer relevant. It is selling to the same Xbox demographic as the first system. No one who is a Nintendo or Sony fan has any desire to buy a 360 outside of people with enough disposable income to buy everything.
* Massive and unprecedented hardware defects
* Weak graphics - low framerates, screen tearing, texture filtering problems, and sub-720p games(the two big 360 graphic games PGR3 and GoW have to rely on bogus marketing shots to sell)
* Ridiculous online fees - no one but hardcore Xbox fans are willing to waste 50 dollars every year
* Joke backwards compatibility
* Miserable library of games - Shooters, shooters,shooters...
* Gimped storage - no next gen disc format - and the clunk and expensive HD-DVD add on that can't even be used for games
Blah, what a mess.
From the developers perspective, the Microsoft solution cen be the best choice - it allows (or will soon) to write games that are cross-compatible between the console and the PC, thereby minimizing the gaming company's efforts to get into both markets. I think that's a very lucrative incentive.
The next generation of MS console will most likely have a motion-sensitive controller as well. They've actually made motion-sensitive products before, so they can easily accomplish and likely top the feat, especially with the advances in technology made so far. I'm sure they already have a prototype already.
Their weak point, however, is lack of backward compatibility - hopefully that will change next time.
Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"?
Oh, great. The hardcore portion of the market. What is this, 5-10% of the market, if that?
Again, what a tremendously huge portion of the market. Maybe check the gamer demographic to see who buys most consoles... You might be surprised at the average age. It's not 13.
Again.. right out of the huge Japanese market. The one that Microsoft is obviously depending on for survival. Or.. wait.. no.
I can't find a single reason this statement makes sense except that it means the 360 isn't the newest thing out there... and some people want the newest thing out there. And guess what, that means they already have a 360 because not too long ago, it WAS the newest thing out there. And now they'll see the problems with their PS3 and that the graphics aren't much better and wonder why they ever bought the 360.
BTW, you can purcahse a 360 HD-DVD player and use it on your PC. It's $200. Or you can buy a PS3 and play Blu-Ray movies for 45 minutes before the system hangs. And there's no firmware update that will fix the hardware problems. Also, go ahead and feel free to be all warm and fuzzy when you find out that your return/replacement turnaround is months and months.
Not to say I told you so.. but the 360 is succeeding right now. In a year, maybe not so much. But by then Microsoft will have firmly seated itself in the console market. Something nobody thought possible, or at least many people didn't, not too long ago. Except me, and maybe a few others.
TLF
TLF
I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
I have watched 11 BD movies on my PS3 and none of them have hung the system. I have seen zero reports of BD movies hanging the PS3. You sir are a fanboi or a troll... or both.
"Most people don't care all that much about graphics when they're enjoying the game they're playing; in fact if you're enjoying the game you will probably not be paying too much attention to any of the graphical effects that are happening."
That's why Pong is cornering the market.
The current winner is the PS2.
Microsoft took the wrong (quickest) route to hardware buildout to launch. They also went as closed hardware as possible. Those decisions will bite them soom.
Think of this: My new PS3 doubles as my desktop.
Remember all the 'I will switch when all my games run on Linux' folks out there? They can now dual boot their shiny PS3 into Linux. Want to play a great game? Boot into PS3 console mode and play away. Need a larger hard drive? Any good SATA laptop drive will fit and work, and with a bit of cobbling you can hook up a 750GB SATA drive, for the true hobbiest.
Having a more open hardware platform lends itself to a richer and more diverse community. Oh wait. Microsoft has a community that you must pay a monthly fee to belong to! In contrast, Sony Online for PS3 is free, and also, Sony has donated code that has been accepted into the main 2.6.20 and above Linux kernels! That means that all PPC Linux builds from now on will work natively on the PS3.
Is the PS3 perfect? No. (512MB RAM) But it is definitely more than you are seeing.
Most folks look at the PS3 and see an expensive console. The wise look at the PS3 and see a great console, a BlueRay player, a desktop replacement, an amazingly attractive unit, and a HUGE, OPEN community.
Game on!
The Wii is without a doubt the best party console. It's a blast to even watch others play and laugh at how stupid they look swinging that remote around. Unfortunately, I've only been able to play it in groups. But I do see how the novelty could wear off when you're not playing with friends.
There are games that just aren't any fun if you're not playing a local multiplayer game. I doubt every wii game would be like that, but I'd have to say I couldn't see myself playing Wii Sports by myself.
My experience is every parallel design fails to achieve its promised potential. Software programmers have a hard time making use of multiple core and multiple processor systems. Almost all programmers have learned software development on single-core/single-processor machines. The result is almost all programs run well on single-core/single-processor computers. Dual-core development isn't too difficult, because many programs have certain natural parallelisms that make it easy to keep two cores busy. If you look at most parallel processing curves, times get really tough when you have more the 4 cores. Not many programs are easy to parallelize at the 4+ core level. The Cell on the PS3 has 7 cores.
A general lack of availability of multi-processor/multi-core developers, and the high-difficulty level of multi-thread software development, will mean that the PS3 development runs late and over-budget. This is a big problem for someone thinking of developing software for the PS3.
There are 10 kinds of people: ones who understand ternary, ones who don't, and ones who think this joke is about binary
They can now dual boot their shiny PS3 into Linux.
While I agree that its a neat ability with the PS3, thinking in pure numbers, this can't attribute more than a tiny tiny fraction of the console buying public.
You could argue the other side too, I have a computer, i don't need a browser on my tv, all I want is games and to stream my photos/videos, why pay more for some things I won't ever use.
But again i'm not trying to be argumentative. You're exactly right, some people will buy the ps3 because they can load linux on it. Some people will buy the 360 because they will soon be able to play the same game with their PC-only friends. And some will buy the Wii because of the controller... its all personal preference and we still have at least a year before we get some hints at who the "winner" will be.
Perhaps what Nintendo understands that no other maker does, is that the last two generations of consoles have cultivated a different kind of consumer/user than previous generations: the "twitch players" which represent a tiny portion of the potential market. Why have so many FPS and violent games come out? Why are developers pandering to this group? I suspect because these games are easy to crank out and don't require nearly as much creativity. As a result, most people don't really give a shit about the "console wars." I know I don't. My last console was the N64 which I abandoned after the dearth of quality games (other than the core Nintendo titles).
It's all about the software. It always has been. The console that has the best software will win. It doesn't matter what the hardware specs are. Great software can compensate for inferior hardware -- though most of today's developers don't seem to understand that. I saw games that ran in 16K of RAM that had more longevity that today's multi-gigabyte monstrosities.
Quite simply, this is why the Wii will come on top. There is no way you can do that with an XBox 360 or a PS3.
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
There are some of us who just want a console. I don't need another computer, another DVD or CD player (or HD-DVD/Blu-Ray for that matter). I just want something to play games on. I can do all the other stuff on other devices I already have, or I can purchase them later and use them. While it's sometimes convenient to have everything in one device, to me that's more of a problem than a feature. There's more code and more hardware, which leads to more things that can go wrong. On top of that, if it does happen to die, you lose ALL that functionality rather than just the one device.
I'm probably not going to buy a PS3 unless they're really, really cheap someday. I'm not buying an XBox360 either because the games just don't interest me. My wife and I went with a Wii on launch day and have thoroughly enjoyed ourselves. Now we can even browse the web on it, though it's probably easier to just get up and walk to the computer room. I'm not complaining that it does a few extra things, because it's taking advantage of hardware that's really already in the system. But, I don't want a living room desktop replacement, and I'd assume a lot of other people don't want one either. We buy consoles to play games.
Remember all the 'I will switch when all my games run on Linux' folks out there? They can now dual boot their shiny PS3 into Linux. Want to play a great game? Boot into PS3 console mode and play away. Need a larger hard drive? Any good SATA laptop drive will fit and work, and with a bit of cobbling you can hook up a 750GB SATA drive, for the true hobbiest.
.001% of the market... maybe...
'kay... that's about
Sony Online for PS3 is free
And sucks...
Sony has donated code that has been accepted into the main 2.6.20 and above Linux kernels! That means that all PPC Linux builds from now on will work natively on the PS3.
Again, what, 0.001% of the market?
If your idea of an free open community being so great would apply to 99.9% of users, then Linux would beat out Windows in the market 10 to 1. But guess what? People are very very happy to pay to use something that works, whether or not they can tinker under the hood. Yes you pay $50/year for an XBox Live account. I pay $15/mo for WoW, what's your point? I finally had a chance to check out Live at a friend's house last week and I have to say I'm shocked. I've never seen something from Microsoft work so well and so intuitively. If it wasn't for the colour scheme having more than two colours, I'd think I was using something Apple made.
I think your view of the average consumer is a wee bit coloured by the glasses you're wearing. The type of user you're describing is Sony's nightmare. They're losing $300+ on each console. The last thing they want you using this thing for is a PC. They NEED you to buy 20 games and 40 blue ray discs so they can actually turn a profit.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Xbox 360 has been out for a year, I've still no interest in getting one.
PS3 is not worth it with the current lineup of games.
Yesterday I tried to buy a Nintendo console for the first time ever but the stores were sold out. I'll be back after new year's when they're restocked.
...in that you call Ernst Adams a 'Designer'. If your main profession for over a decade hasn't been Game Design, then I think that term ceases to be relevant for you. Hopefully one day Gamasutra will realise that too.
So in summary, Microsoft, I don't care what you have to do, but get lots more top quality games out there. Both original titles, and Live classics. Steal from Sony's back catalog as much as possible.
Strange last time I heard anything about programming/designing for the PS3 is that it was even more of a bitch to do than it was on the PS2!
Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo will easily lose out in this gen if they don't get developers to make plenty of worthwhile games. The 360 has the advantage here, as it's already got a large user base (relatively speaking) and devs know how to develop for it. PS3 may overtake the 360 if BluRay catches on and/or if developers are able to unleash the "unlimited" power of the cell processor to deliver compelling game experiences that the 360 just can't provide. Wii is sort of the wild card - how well will the controller work? Will it be something revolutionary, that adds to just about every game? Or a gimmick that only works well for a few games, but is more of a hindrance than anything for most others? While initial reviews seem positive, the long-term outcome remains to be seen (as an analogy, some games just don't work on the DS that play beautifully on the PSP)
:->) than any of their competitors. Also, because this is Microsoft, and they've shown time and time again that they're able to enter a market late, the underdog, only to come out to dominate it (through their own merit, through mistakes of competitors, or through nefarious means..)
And let's remember what happened last generation - the console that had the one year lead (the PS2) built up a library of games that the other consoles were not able to match (and this is a self-reinforcing cycle.. more games means more gamers means more games..) and indisputably won.
My money's on Microsoft.. because they've got the most compelling game experience right now with a larger library and cheaper games (I picked up PD:Z for $12.99
I am the maverick of Slashdot
except that hard core gamers should not get the PS3, because it's GPU is actually _slower_ than the x360...
and because there's no rumble (i still can't believe sony left this off).
boycott the ps3 until they add rumble back on!
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
First, the PS3 is not the most powerful game machine on the planet. Both Nvidia and ATI are releasing a new generation of very powerful video cards. The 8800 is already out. Any computer with a high end next generation PC Video card is going to be able to curb stomp the PS3. A significant performance gap between the PS3 and the Xbox 360 is far from proven.
Second, the Wii is not that cheap. $249 is not that far off from the $339 for an Xbox 360 Core system with a memory unit. I would prefer a Premium myself, but to each their own. Anyone buying a Wii is buying it because that's the console they want, not because they're cheap. Gameplay is important, but I like decent graphics with my gameplay. We don't know whether the current heavy demand for the Wii is in the general gamer populace or from Zelda fanatics. I'm not trying to be derogatory, it's just that Zelda lovers REALLY love Zelda. 75% of Wii purchasers also bought Zelda.
Third, the Xbox 360 is about to pass the 10 million mark in consoles sold. Whether it happens before Christmas (once the sales figures are calculated) or soon after, it will happen. The Dreamcast sold a total of 10.6 million consoles.
Fourth, the demand for the PS3 has plummeted. Look on eBay right now and look at PS3s for sale. It has dropped down to $100 above MSRP. That's with a crippling shortage. Sony has placed an incredible burden on companies that develop games exclusively for the PS3. Every month, more games drop their exclusivity and are brought over to the Xbox 360.
The Xbox 360 may come in third. Japanese sales are awful. But Japan is third behind the Europe and the U.S. in console sales (remember only 128 million Japanese). As well, many Japanese may opt for the Nintendo DS this generation and forgoe a console. The Japanese live in tight quarters and have long commute times, making a portable the optimal choice. The Xbox 360 is pricey, but the other consoles are pricey for what your getting. The Wii is based on the Gamecube architecture and really should cost about $199 with a game. And nobody wants to pay $599 for a game console. So Microsoft should drop the price of a Premium Xbox 360 to $299 with a game. It would be a much more appropriate price.
You have a computer, yes, but more than one. (Since this is slashdot, probably yes) But many don't, and there's feuding in many households about who gets to use the computer, which for many folks is not a gaming machine.
The PS3 changes that. It's a good gaming machine that's also a computer. It slices, ti dices. If people are going to have one anyway why not install Linux on it and get even more use out of it. Especially if SCEfoo puts some marketing muscle behind Linux.
I do have to admit that I'm one of the people that Linux on the PS3 is aimed at, I've got a PS2 that does nothing but run Linux. I dual booted it for a couple of years, until I got a second one.
I think of Linux on the PS3 as Sony's Trojan horse designed to reduce MS's penetration into the "household's second computer" market.
Ok, while I'm sure your post applies accurately to yourself, I'm not sure it applies to anybody else ever. How many people are going to use a PS3 as a desktop computer? How many people even know it's possible to do so? Maybe 0.1% of the market, and I'm being generous there.
Oh wait. Microsoft has a community that you must pay a monthly fee to belong to!
$50 a year. Not a month. It's not a monthly fee. It's $50 a year. And you can belong to the community without paying a cent, to download movies, game demos, buy Xbox Live Arcade games.
For your $50, you get free VOIP and voicemail service, the assurance that there are a lot of people working hard to prevent any players from cheating and assuring that griefers are kicked from the service. I think it's worth it.
Sony's system, on the other hand... well... it's barely even a system. It's the same thing we've had with PC games for decades; every company has their own, separate, servers, none of which can talk to each other. There's no uniformity in user names or interface.
and a HUGE, OPEN community.
If by HUGE, OPEN you mean "a few Linux nuts," then yes.
Comment of the year
I think Gamestops are the only places with the Interactive displays.
Yes, and everyone knows that Linux users are SUCH as huge part of the market (I among them). Besides, Linux on the PS3 is crippled by lack of hardware support.
Well, I have the money to buy all three at whatever price point (corporate lawyer; the route for nerds who are bad at math and have no taste for medicine), but you won't find me doing it. (I'm not a Hilton or shipping heir; I don't spend money just because I can.)
Why no PS3? First, the idea of 'system exclusive' games seems to be evaporating (see, e.g., Assassin's Creed, Grand Theft Auto 4) and we are seeing top games slotted for both 360 and PS3. This is possibly because (a) the cost of development is too high to limit games to one system or (b) the developers have opt-outs in their exclusivity contracts with Sony that are triggered by Sony's failure to get consoles onto store shelves (you can only sell as many exclusive games as there are consoles to play them on, see (a)). And I haven't heard anything about Sony solving its problems with manufacturing those blu-ray diodes - anyone care to bet on how far after its 'PS3 exclusive' release Metal Gear 4 will come to the 360?
Second, is the PS3 more powerful than the 360? Maybe, but it is immaterial at this point - by the time developers are able to code to the level where it is apparent, the performance of PC's will have far outstripped it and its 'most powerful' status would be essentially meaningless to me.
Third? XBox Live. Period. We'll see if Sony can ever get some sort of comparable networking service up and running. (Live has been running for quite a while, so Sony has had more than enough time to prepare a response; yet they have little to show for it. This makes me think they have no real plan.)
Dude, stop posting on behalf of sony.
This bluray crap is just a joke, look.... go to any torrent site, and you can already get 4-7 ps3 games, all under 8gig.
So much for this "GAMES REQUIRE BLURAY" crap.
The only reason backward compat sux is because MS switched from Nvidia to ATI, now if MS just paid that $30 per 360 for an aditional
Nvidia original chip in each box you would have 100% backward compat since emulating the pentium would be a snap. I agree thats MSs
biggest failures is to kill the original xbox. They still could have made a small xbox and cheap to all the 3rd world/cheaper nations.
NOTE to MS: its still worth growing your cheaper pregen base so that they can be a future updater. Sony has at least that right
with the ps2 still going strong.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
It's not crippled for standard desktop use purposes, web browsing, photo editing, e-mail, IRC, IM, in other words the majority of the things people use their computers for.
And again, if Sony would put some marketing into Linux, you'd see the numbers grow.
You know, it's kind of funny. For a while now people have been slowly turned off the videogame... the drain as be slow but it's beginning to get very noticeable. The main reason to this, I think, has been the slow over complication to games as of late... both in design and function, it something that developer on a whole seem to note and would like to improve. This is where the next gen becomes very interesting, since it is less about how many good games you have to a platform as it is how many player can be attracted to said platform. With this is mind, most of the industry seem to be content into the graphical evolution of systems today... in other words, most manufactures seem to think that designers in particular will as happy with the gflops pushing as their gamers are. But that is the thing about gamers today... you would think that most would care about processing power, vectorization, anti-aliasing and effects would be sorely wrong. There are gamers that do think this matters, but for the most part... gamers are not as cut and dry as the industry makes us out to be, and even by those standards they are shooting at the most narrow group. This little article seem to name that group the 'hardcore' gamer, those among us that take our games VERY seriously, that demand more and more power out of there hardware, that are content with the same experience with very subtle differences. The funny thing about the 'hardcore' group is that they are not the most populous in gamers, and they are very easy to define. The most populous of gamers has many names to them, the most command is the 'Casual' or 'Non' gamer label, and they are indeed this rather fickle group since they are not as easy to define. The few games that come up when defining this group is the xRevolution games (i.e.: Dance Dance Revolution, Para Para Revolution, Karaoke Revolution and Rev-like games), the xMania games (I.e.: DrumMania, BeatMania, GuitarMaina and Mania-like games (Guitar Hero's and so on)), the Sony Eyetoy games, Nintendo's Touch Generation games (known for the Big Brain series among others), Phoenix Wright, The Sims and SimCity, Nintendogs/Nintencats, etc.... It a vast little demographic that tends to generate a lot of numbers. These are the people that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo would like to have aboard there platfroms... And the developers to make the games for them.
This is where some of what this Ernest Adams is saying seem to be off... for that hardcore gamer, it's the 360 right now, it has the titles, development is challenging but easy, they have bet the farm on being Online (which, seems to be working all the right for them) with such demanding high-profile games having some LIVE component. And they have be given a bit of a gift from Sony, more developers that have been pissed off at the price point of the PS3 system, the complex development tools and Sony's general management of developers. The problem being is that for that other demographic (I shall call them Casual gamers), 360 fails really badly... case in point is Viva Pinata, a Rare-developed game from Microsoft, where marketing seem to be the grand failure in to why it's not been as much of a hit as it could have been. Microsoft is too concerned with the hardcore demographic, to put any effort into a game like Viva Pinata that would hit really well with the Nintendogs/Nintencats crowd and market solely for such a vast group (oh and please note, as fair as I am concerned, Viva Pinata got good reviews and it quite a good game... it just that those getting Gear of War, per-se, are not the same one that would even look at the cover of Viva Pinata, sad but IMO that it the truth of the matter). Even still, if developers and publishers want to cater to the hardcore gamer, 360 seem to have all that you wanting, power, simple tools and the people to play those said game.
PS3 is in a long line of rather impressive electronics, it's a Blu-ray player, it plays DVD's, it has a hard drive, it's a Blue-tooth unit, it's a Wi-fi unit, the CELL chip, OpenGL ES, the SI
How is it an grand parent post gets modded down as "overrated" and the parent post that just states agreement gets modded up +5?
its clear this guy knows as much about gaming and gamers as i do about rocket science
I was planning on getting a ps3 for a long time, even after numerous negative reports. I expected the system to be more powerful then the 360 and to have a great deal more software. However almost every high profile developer is makign games for both systems and even those that stated exclusivity have changed their minds (like sega and virtua fighter). If the ps3 doesn't reach a certain amount of sales within 9 months I don't see them being able to have any exclusives anymore.
s sassin_s_Creed_Will_Feature_Better_AI_Than_PS3
Maybe it's because Kutaragi has been sucking with developer relations as a month old next-gen article mentioend (companies interested in developing exclusives for the ps3 not being able to get a ahold of kutaragi back when he still was in charge).
The biggest reason the ps3 is a blunder is the cost and relatively weak technology. According to the latest reliable article from next-gen the premium ps3 is estimated to cost $840 to build (the blu-ray components are a measly $125) of that. They took a massive gamble on the cell chip and it doesn't deliver. It's an interesting design for a chip however from all reports it's not any better for GAMES then a triple core 3.2ghz power pc that the 360 has. The cell only has one powerpc core and 7 other spe's which are far from being able to do what a full power pc core can.
Programmers are more easibly able to implement things like AI withoutt taking a performance hit on the 360 according to Ubisoft montreal in this article:
http://digg.com/gaming_news/Xbox_360_Version_of_A
What's worse is that some state the graphics chip in the 360 is just as powerful or more so then Nvidia's RSX for the ps3.
The ps2 came about before the xbox and it was smaller had a massive reputation and by then was cheaper then the ps2. Their was a lot of momentum for the ps2 and consumers bought it up and developers delivered numerous exclusives for it. The ps3 is in the original xbox's position now as far as timeline goes and it's not any more powerful then the 360 which costs $330 to produce the premium version versus $840 for the ps3 (Sony is NOT in the best position to take that much of a hit in the long term). Consumers see a $200 dollar price difference which is a big deal.
For this reason and the lack of supply i think we'll see a lot of support for their direct competitor, the 360. Microsoft is throwing money developers, giving them solid and cheap dev tools, and is innovating on the online front.
I'm a cheap broke ass who will wait another 9 months before i buy anything but It's no longer going to be the ps3. If final fantasy or metal gear stop being exclusive I won't even bat an eye to the system. It's just a big mess architechuraly.
Hmmm... Pie...
not only do i disagree with the author on the same point as the parent but i think this whole article is just a waste of time. all it is, is the same idle speculation that everyone else is doing on the internet with nothing of real substance to back up any of the claims. who cares if it's "from a developers point of view" if said developer is as uninsightful as everybody else out there. plus he seems to be sloppy on the details like this little bit:
_ video_game_consoles), but it also enjoyed a much greater lifespan. of course it got absolutely destroyed by the ps1 but it most definitely was not number 3 to sega's 2 for that generation.
"In the optical media era, Sony brought out the Playstation, Sega gave us the Saturn, and Nintendo hung onto cartridges for one more generation with the N64. From being a major contender, Nintendo dropped into third place and has since failed to recover."
The saturn was number 2 for that generation? what? not only did the N64 have much better sales (over 3 times the sales: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling
he also glosses over important facts in pushing forward his 2 and a half consoles theory (which i think is rediculous)such as the fact that the market is expanding, creating more and more room for other consoles (you can see this by viewing the sales numbers in the above link). shoot, if you want to call the sega saturn a viable contender for its generation then you would have to except the fact that there were 4 major systems in this last generation with the dreamcast showing sales numbers just a bit greater than the saturn did in its generation.
if you really trace things out we've gone from one dominant company with nintendo's nes and a weak second in the sega master system, to two major companies with the genesis and the snes, to 3 with the saturn, n64 and ps1 (although the saturn did terribly here), to a more stable 3 with the gamecube, ps2 and xbox (with even a weak 4th in the dreamcast). Following this trend i think it stands to reason that there now might be room for three successful systems competing on the same level that the genesis and snes were competing at.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Somehow I doubt Sony Legal is going to let a ps1 emulator on the 360 slide.
F*ckin MS fanboy. Don't argue if you don't even know the facts. That was the PS2, the PS3 is different.
Are you saying having the console Linux-enabled is a bad thing?
First off, my response is in no means authroritve. I only know 10 designers, and know their feelings, I also work at a studio of over 100 people in the game industry. That being said my "research" is more valid then Ernest Adams for a couple reasons. The main one is that most of the people I've discussed this with don't give a simple answer like "PS3 will win because it's more powerful" which is a flat out cop out. Or assumes you believe that buyers are morons who don't notice a 200 dollar price tag differential with out a 200 dollar perfomance differential. Only a few people bought the Neo Geo, and remember that was over "4" times more powerful then the other systems (at 3 times the cost) Hint. The Corvette, isn't oversold by Lamborgini Diablos.... Why?
The prevalant view is that no one is going to lose this round. At least not drop out. If someone does it's Sony, pure and simple. They are not turning a profit, don't have a good starting position, their company is in ruins and looking to cut a lot of budget, and the system is asking for more commitment at both ends then the other two. In addition their "Entertainment center" idea is just flat going to fuck them, because unless people constantly buy games, they would have been better off just selling Blu-ray. That being said, they will sell a LOT of systems, the problem is how many games will the sell. No Xbox Live, and other Microsoft developer helpers hurts them. The motion controller is also difficult to work with and their processor is crap for a developer. It's full potential won't be reached not because it's so powerful but because it's layed out in such a poor style. A 360 can get full potential by any programmer who knows about multithreading, GPU vs. CPU, and simple optimization. You might not get direct control of the hardware but in these days no one really wants it. Why does renderware sell? Because it controlled the hardware, not the programmer.
The 360 does a lot to help the programmer, and that's a big step, from match making, to networking code, to Directx, the programmer is put at ease. Porting a game to the 360 is a lot easier then to the PS3. That being said, what's important is sales and not developer's feelings. The point I'm bringing up here, is that the 360 is developer friendly, and with the big inroads that Blue dragon has made in a certain foreign market, Sony might have some issues. But this only talks about games. So let's look at current system sells.
Ps3s will sell in Japan of course, but the fact I've walked into 3 stores in the last 3 days, and seen PS3s in them isn't speaking highly of what sony has done. The fact that people are returning ps3 mainly because they can't sell them on Ebay speaks of intent to buy versus intent to resell. Yes those systems might not last long, but Wiis are selling out instantly with over four times the quanities already hitting stores.
Again is this important? No, This is just discussing what the trends to today is. So what's the prime goal. Well I'll explain who "Wins" The winner is the one who makes the most money and the most units. Note that this is NOT the same person, but the true winner the one you should care about but don't is the one who makes the most money. They will definatly continue to the next round.
The 360 has almost 10 million units out there right now. That's a shit load of units, but in reality it is far from insurmountable for Sony to come back from. The extra year has given Microsoft a good lead. Great. On the other hand Sony is having trouble breaking 1 million, and Wii is probably going to get 2-4 in the next 3 monthes. The 360 has exclusive titles, as does the Wii. Sony has "announced" certain titles, but dates are getting fuzzy, and exclusiviness is being called into question. Sony has lost a couple. However They still claim to have the big 2 (MGS, and Final Fantasy) and after FFXII's big launch, that's good however looking at the other exclusives they've had one can notice I didn't meantion stuff like Assassin'
Which one will have Spongebob Squarepants platform games? Uhh.... a **ahem** friend would like to know.... ;-)
A little bit off topic, but has somebody any subjective or objective data from the noice level
and power consumptions of WII, 360 and PS3?
Does anybody want to play Frozen Bobble?
It's called "emulation" and it has been around for years.
First on geek's compters,
then on PDAs (the glory of Zodiac and GP32),
then on hacked consoles (DreamCast had one of the biggest scene, the PSP is a widely available handheld that can also be hacked to run emulators).
then officially on consoles (Sega produced a lot of arcade/console ports for Dreamcast, most of which where only CPS emulator + data. Fun fact : their Megadrive/Genesis port for Dreamcast used code from a emulator for PC)
and after years of battling against emulators and suing everyone, Nintendo finally realised that there *was* actually a market of nostalgic fans and slowly joined the movement, first by re-adapting titles for the Advance and then creating the "Virtual console" concept for the Wii.
So yes, although you meant to be sarcastic, you're actually right. Oldies are a big hit because their cheap (may be found for free on the NET or sold for pennies on console's on-line services) and there's a huge library of them.
And we may add : those games back then that were successful, were mostly because of their gameplay (hard to be successful with the graphics that could be offered by consoles back then), and therefore have a good chance to have aged well and to still have value today.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
No you're wrong. They'll have Duke Nukem Forever.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
"SNK Neo-Geo with its huge $70 cartridges"
He's wrong, unless he means purely the manufacturing costs of the cartridges.
Take a look at the slightly newer entry, console retrospective which verifies what I recalled the cost of SNK games to be, or $200, along with the console itself being an outrageous $600. Sound familiar yet?
XBOX360 v. PS3:
Hmmm... I've read several other developers comments wrt the XBOX's CPU each core can really be used as a general purpose processor whereas on the PS3 each core tends to be specialized towards a particular applications. Added to this were other notes questioning the memory subsystem architecture of the PS3, boiling down to: unless there are workarounds it's going to severely hamper bandwidth, which added to point number 1 made the PS3 less attractive of a platform to develop for. (This doesn't even add in other factors that were mentioned like the lousy/expensive PS3 dev kits v. XBOX fairly friendly kit, expected sales of the console(they seemed to have problems with it's pricing), lack of a similar online component to MS's XBOX live. Bottomline ended up with that most of them deciding to focus on XBOX360 & Wii... unless the PS3 miraculously, sold better than they expected it to.)
While studying for a degree in Game Production Management one of the course texts was a book called On Game Design by Ernest Adams and some other dude who's name escapes me, now having read the entire article on gamasutra i think Ernest likes the look of his own written words. The first thing i asked myself was when did he write this piece? has it been sitting on his hard drive for a while? it seems so, my best guess was around about May time just after the last E3 because thats the perspective that it took on the situation. I can only speculate that Ernest hasn't been reading the very bad press surrounding the PS3 and its insistance on moving away from being a Games Console first and foremost. I really cant believe i trusted this guy's opinion on Game Design, his half baked ideas should and could have been much more thought out. Ernest needs to think outside the box more and step out of the timewarp that he lives in and realise that the market dynamics have changed incredibly since the times of the analogies that he was using in the article. Ernest needs to realise that the PS3 is leaking Exclusives like a rusty squashed flat bucket on its side that it really is, he needs to understand the development requirements of the PS3 versus Xbox 360 and he needs to understand that the Wii is something brand new to people and that counts for everything. Most of all though if this is all Ernest has to say then he should really keeps his uninformed opinions to himself.
I'm not a Microsoft zealot, I do admire the goals behind linux and the open source community. The business practices of both Sony and Microsoft are equally dubious so that isn't really a factor. All that I care about is which one is the most value for money, and currently the 360 is way ahead.
> Microsoft has proven that they can design a solid online offering, providing centralized friends lists, voice, chat, messages, easy matchmaking, really cool and innovative (as well as retro) games on XLA, coutnless downloads (that work in the background) and more. The PS3 forces each developer to provide their own online support or demand that gamers subscribe to a third-party service.
Sony has proven that gamers who purchase a game can actually play it online without having to pay extra for the "privilege". The XBox 360 forces each player to provide their own friends for local multiplayer, or demands that gamers subscribe to their first-party service if they want to play anything online.
A lot of people act like XBox Live, wireless controllers, and direct-download games are somehow universal positives that everyone would find appealing. Personally, I don't want to pay extra to play my games online, I don't want to have to recharge my game controllers and deal with input lag and dropouts, and I want a physical backup of my game purchase so I don't have to deal with a computerized phone system when some server decides my game license isn't valid anymore.
It's ridiculous to think Nintendo is even trying to overtake a position on the Next-Gen console front. The Wii maybe the "next biggest thing" from them, but it's not designed to be the end-all product the PS3 or Xbox 360 are... at least no more than the DS is intended to be the true successor to the Gameboy line. Like the DS, the Wii is simply an experimental product intended to prevent the game industry from stagnating itself into oblivion, while also not costing an arm and a leg in the process.
Let's face it, consumers do want a Nintendo handheld that can compete with the PSP in terms of raw power. Obviously, the technology is already available for Nintendo to develop such a device, but it can't yet be produced inexpensively or meet the the guidelines of portability Nintendo demands in its products, to be viable. This doesn't mean Nintendo won't develop such a product eventually, but they're going to demand it to be at least as portable and rugged as the GBA SP, with enough battery life to last around 20hrs between charges... none of which the PSP lives up to. Once these demands can be met for a low enough price, Nintendo will probably release a new version of the gameboy, probably matching the PSPs current graphical and storage capabilities closely, while at the same time avoiding the awkward nature of the DS's stylus based interface. The same will be true of the Wii a few years from now, when a true gamecube follow-up is produced to compete on equal footing with the 360 and the PS3.
Until then, both the DS and the Wii are decent enough placeholders to give Nintendo the time they need for the technology costs and advancements needed reach the levels they want.
8==8 Bones 8==8
With all the much better articles denied we still seem to get a glut of stupid posts like this. Okay, from a designer's perspective. There was no substance. It was so light and IMHO no real arguments to support the author's standpoint except for Wii. Yes, I think it's clear that Nintendo's strategy for the Wii was a good move and innovative. It's going to appeal to a lot of people, particularly mom's who see it as a much more athletic alternative.
But the comments regarding the PS3 & Xbox 360. And why the 360 is going to be the loser. No real supportive arguments were made. How much superior is the PS3 hardware? It's funny, because the comments that are general said about the PS3 is that it is the new generation's Xbox. It's big, overly priced, has more power but the game quality isn't taking advantage of it and the game play is eh. If anything, that would make me believe the PS3 might be the second. Except that Nintendo's Wii came out with an innovative strategy that I think will put it on top of the PS3.
Then there's the profibility. Who's losing money and how much? Sure, all PS3's are sold out...right now. But in a year when those are stocked is anyone really going to want to pay $600+ for one? Will the masses? Rumor has it that the 360 is entering profibility. This allows Microsoft to cut the prices. Economically, I am not sure SONY has the room for a loss. If the PS3 fails to do well it could spell doom. Even second fiddle might not be enough for the beleaguered SONY. Then what?
That said.....what I was really hoping to hear from this article was in regards to designing/programming games. And what advantage each system has in that regard.
- Saj
This is kind off-topic, but since it looks like several hard-core gamers are reading this, I'll give a shot.
I bought a PS2 like a year and a half ago, mostly for my girlfriend, who enjoys it very much. I don't use it at all, except for some quick football matchs with Pro Evo Soccer.
The question is: the only games that seems to appeal to her are the Prince of Persia series. All of the other titles just don't fit her profile. I'm considering buying a Wii, which looks fun, but it's not on sale in my country yet and several years might happen before it is available here.
So, the question is: are there any PS2 games as fun as the prince of persia series out there?
Thanks and sorry for the OT.
Now I am sad.
And yet you still can't spell "hobbyist". What does "hobbiest" even mean? It's hobbier than all the other hobbies? I don't get it.
I'm predicting the Wii and the XBOX 360 will be the top two. I got a Wii on launch and so far it's just plain fun, and if Nintendo does the Mii system right for online personas and multiplayer it will be great, not to mention the News Channel, Opera Browser, Weather Channel, and Virtual Console. The Opera Browser could be the first link in the chain between Gaming, Internet, and TV.
The XBOX 360 boasts many of these same things and currently IMO the XBOX 360 is leading the pack with online interaction and gaming. Having the ability to download trailers for games, movies, and video clips for your favorite TV shows is instant gratification.
Slashdot = -1 Redundant, Asperger, kdawson FUD, Libertarian, and Linux
I do agree that MS doesn't have nearly the lead that they need now if they expect to be the leader, they didn't make much of the last year. In another 3 to 6 months, it'll be a straight out foot race and don't be fooled in to thinking that Sony doesn't have options with pricing to be more competitive. Also, looking at some of the comparisons between games on both platforms, it's currently a dead heat where the differences are coming down to style and taste preferences; the difference is these are 2nd year games for the 360 and first gen games for the PS3 so presumably the PS3 has more room to get better.
The other thing that really stands out to me. Nintendo is what they've always been and that's a software company that makes great games. They've always done that. Maybe not a lot of games but usually pretty killer ones. If the controller issue is that big, why won't MS and Sony simply release new controller for their platforms?
I'm sad to say that as a whole Slashdotters have missed the forest for the trees on this.
:)
Enjoyable dead-horse debates here but all are splitting hairs, missing the point, and fairly clueless.
The only thing I can't figure out is if the preponderance of fanboys are shotgun happy contract trolls or if the sea of tech-savvy enthusiasts has really become so lost in the hype.
Use your brains and wrap your minds around a subject before posting you slackers. I know you're better than this.
Flame on flamers
The price point is down to what I feel it should be, the bugs have been shaken out, and I've got a large catalog of pre-reviewed games to choose from.
In 2001 I bought a Dreamcast bundle for $100 on close-out and had my choice of Dreamcast games for $5 a pop.
Being an early adopter in the VG console arena is just not worth the price or the bother.
In five years, I'll pick up a PS3 or an XBox 360 for a hundred bucks and find out what the fuss is all about.
Plop a PS2 down in front of a room of twenty-somethings, and more likely than not you'll get the guys playing on the console while the gals chit-chat or whatever.
A couple weeks ago, I was at a party where there was a Wii -- everyone was playing it. I was astounded. I don't think that there has ever been a gaming console that has appealed to the majority of females.
Now, IIRC, about 50% of the planet is female, so, who's going to win this round of consoles?
I've place my bet on the Wii.
gotta love it when your console lives on 3rd party games! none of which have to/or probably will remain exclusive titles. We've already seen MGS on other consoles (and signs are pointing that the next one will also live on the 360) - Final Fantasy could always come out for the 360 as well (especially with the 360 gaining quickly in the world of RPGs). Devil May Cry already came out for the PC and I'm sure Capcom (which has already been showing nice love to the 360/MS) would have no issues releasing a game on both consoles. MS also seems to not mind forking out some extra cash to bring these games over (the list of 'ps3 exclusives' now coming out for the 360 seems to grow every week - Virtua Fighter 5 just in the past few days).
It doesn't make any sense for these 3rd parties to NOT release their games on both the PS3 and 360 - especially with the current state of PS3 sales - and the slowing of those sales (on ebay for example) - your MAJOR sony fans already got their consoles (a number of whom seem unhappy) and there's no signs that any great software will drive hardware sales for quite some time...
And that, I think, is the most amazing part of the Wii: it's absolutely viral. Every part of it is viral: Even the stupid videos where people throw their remotes and the strap snaps, and the parodies of these videos with people with Wii controllers shot into their eyes - people talk about the Wii. At my work place, during the last week, the Wii has been discussed during lunch break almost every day. Normally, we don't even talk about gaming, but the Wii changed that.
I brought my Wii to work once, and of the four people who played it, two already ordered one. I've actually had girls who visited ask to power up the Wii and play a bit of Tennis - normally, they wouldn't touch a gamepad with a ten foot pole. I've had "Wii parties" where people came over specifically to play Wii, and some of these people have already ordered a Wii of their own - more would have bought one if they were available anywhere.
The Wii is totally viral. It infects everyone who plays with it.
Yeah, and I expect that new-fangled d-pad to be passé any day now. Oh wait, the innovation is in the games, and since the Remote allows for more if it than a traditional gamepad, there's no issue whatsoever of it becoming stale. Sure, the holodeck itself ceases being a novelty, but next week, you get dragon hunters, and the week after that hot sexbot action, and the week after that sea diving, and so on. The fishing controller, on the other hand, will always give you fishing games.
What is this illusion that xbox was a solid #2 behind the ps2? First, even on the xbox' strongest territory, North America, xbox was a distant second to the ps2. Second, North America was the only territory where microsoft was ahead of nintendo. In Europe xbox was more or less tied with the gamecube, and in japan we all know the xbox story.
This really speaks highly of microsoft's marketing, since a lot of people in North America (including designers it would seem) seem to be under the impression that in terms of install base, microsoft wasn't that far behind from sony.
This is a developer? I call bullshit.
"Cartridges have the advantage of being sturdy and chewable, thus good for little kids, but they're slow and expensive to make,"
Slow? Since when the fuck is RAM slow? They were SMALL compared to CDroms, but they were NEVER slow.
Either he went out of his relm of experience in going over the N64 - or he's one dumbshit of a developer.
Oh fuck this guy is a moron:
"Sure, there's the Nunchuck to give them a joystick, and even the Wii Classic Controller, which looks startlingly like a good old SNES controller with added joysticks. But these are extra-cost items; they can't save the Wii if the ordinary Wii Remote tanks with the consumer."
Um - the nunchuck comes with the unit. It's not a extra-cost item. Someone please stick his head in a microwave - it's not done.
This is kind of a Chicken/Egg issue. As long as people don't buy PS3s, exclusive titles will not remain exclusive. As long as there are no exclusive titles, there's no reason to buy a 600-bucks-console if the same games run on a 400-bucks-console.
(Disclaimer: I own a PSP.)
Yes, there are good games for the PSP. No, there are not enough good portable games. Most good PSP games are ports or new versions of PS2 games, generally with similar gameplay (and generally less playable due to the PSP's single analog "nipple"). If I can't play a game during a 15 minutes train ride, I might as well buy it for the PS2.
My PSP has pretty much become my portable Lost player.
Yes, I own Loco Roco, and it's one of the few example of a genuinely new and "portable" game (it has a few other issues, such as always repeating itself, though). Mercury Meltdown I've only heard good things about. I wanted to try the japanese Demo, but my PSP decided to not let me download demos anymore and I had to completely reset it. When I finally found the time to do so, the demo was gone, so I haven't yet been able to look into it.
Another nice portable PSP game is Ultimate Block Party. It's somewhat similar to Lumines, but doesn't drag on and on into hour-long gaming sessions.
I also own a GBA and a DS, so I might be a bit spoiled. On these two consoles - especially on the DS - there are many, many games like Loco Roco: Funny little time wasters you can a) not play on any other console and b) take out for a quick few minutes of gaming whenever you've got a bit of time to waste.
Agreed. I use PSPWare on the Mac, which is quite nice, but I still have to download the shows from some P2P service and then let PSPWare convert them, which often takes a lot of time and sometimes doesn't work on the first try.