Slashdot Mirror
An Evening With Sony Computer Entertainment
Thursday evening, senior Sony representatives such as Phil Harrison (President of Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios) and David Karraker (Head of SCEA's PR division) sat down with the posters from a bunch of websites, looking to ease relations between the company and their customers. Along with folks from The San Jose Mercury News, Joystiq, Kotaku, and MTV, we discussed a number of the issues raised in the comments here on Slashdot the day before yesterday. My goal in going to the event was to make sure that your concerns were heard. Over the last several months, I've heard many complaints leveled against Sony and their products, and I was hoping to bring back some answers. To be honest, I walked away not fully satisfied. Read on for answers to some of the criticisms you, the readers, have leveled against Sony in the last several months.
I took notes, but a lot of ground was covered, and not all of it was probably of interest. To give you a sense of context, we were all gathered around a large table in a hotel just off of Union Square. The event was held in the early evening, and lasted for approximately two hours. While everyone was certainly civil, there were a number of tough questions passed around. Here is what I felt was most important to you folks:
- A goodly amount of the discussion centered around Sony's newly announced Home project. The dangers of allowing uploadable content were raised, and we were assured that PSN parental controls will be fully in place within the game world. There will be a few quick button options to black out the screen (in case of offensive images) and to kill the audio (in case of offensive language). Public spaces will be moderated (and instanced, if you're curious), though they were a bit vague on just how those individuals would work economically. They're still working out the details.
- I was intrigued on Wednesday (as were a number of readers) by the possibility of indie games in the Arcade rooms they showed off. Phil Harrison responded by saying that it is something they're very interested in. Originally, all of the games were going to be done in Java but technical problems arose. The games are now done in C. If they can wrap up the tools in an easy package, they'd be very happy to release them and allow community-created games onto the service.
- Revenue for the service will be handled via object sales, advertising, and b2b elements in vendor areas. Those concerned about the 'amount of free' that you'll get as an intro Home user should know that they're hoping to offer a fair amount off the bat. 'Free' includes a basic apartment, access to the public spaces, a 'reasonable' number of avatar customization options, and a 'starter' set of furniture. Better views out your window will be purchasable, along with new apartments.
- Everyone from Sony in the room heavily resisted comparisons to Second Life, and other services. In Mr. Harrison's words "That would be heavily oversimplifying both Home and Second Life." Along the lines of hacking the service to allow Second Life-style sexual animations, the reps were fairly confident that they'd dodge that bullet. The service itself doesn't allow avatar touching, and doesn't currently have emotes that approximate those actions. They eventually hope to have 100% of online-connected users on the service. Currently, the number of online connected PS3's is somewhere around 500,000 in NA; roughly 50% of the North American consoles.
- Right now the download is around 450 megs, but that's going to probably shrink and grow over the course of development.
- The subject of Sony's arrogant public demeanor was broached, as well as the poor public relations message we've been getting in the last several months. The ThreeSpeech blog was broached, and the folks in the room actually clarified the purpose and reality behind the 'semi-official' blog. ThreeSpeech is actually a European entity, intended to be a public forum in which Sony-related matters can be discussed and information can be brought to the public's attention. The people behind ThreeSpeech are some of the most respected games journalists in the UK; it would be like if a US version of the site were staffed by the likes of CNN's Chris Morris, and man-of-many-talents Geoff Keighley. Because UK gamers know and trust the ThreeSpeech staff, there's an implicit understanding (in that country) that the message coming from the site is not 'tainted.' It was pointed out the lack of attribution to posts across the site is a barrier to acceptance, and they took that under advisement. For the most part, it seems, the bad reputation that ThreeSpeech here in the states seems to be a case of cultural misunderstanding. While I still don't like the term 'semi-official', I did feel as though the concept behind the site made a great deal more sense to me after this chat. Some of the other attendees were not as reassured.
- The element that I want to convey, which I took away from the discussion of Sony's arrogance, was that arrogance is not the feeling I get from them in person. These people are, instead, supremely confident in their products and services. Thanks to the impersonal nature of quotes and the numerous (rightly decried) public relations gaffes they've suffered, their confidence can easily be seen as arrogance by third party information consumers. This is not to say the company on the whole is not arrogant; I just want to make it clear the people I was in the same room with Thursday night did not have the attitude of inherently arrogant individuals.
- This discussion went on to include the question of the PS3's pricetag, which was a subject never fully addressed to my satisfaction. There was some talk of the PS3 as a lifestyle, and the still-important question of why Blu-ray technology is necessary. Peripherals such as the EyeToy were mentioned as 'making the PS3 disappear from the equation', which given the cost of the system seemed to be a poor choice of words. Not much of substance resulted from the Sony 'side of the table' on this subject, and that attitude left me feeling a bit frustrated. The system's cost won't be changing for some time now, and there's apparently not much to talk about on that subject. This was the one element that I went into the session hoping to deal with directly, and unfortunately came away feeling let down.
- As a final note, it was stated directly that "There is no direct evidence that Blu-Ray has been hacked." Their attitude is that the encryption is strong, and that it will be a long time before it's cracked.
critisizms in the past months ? They are fucking up customers for over 3 years in star wars galaxies. Not only that, but they are fucking up entire star wars fan community as well. Ask them why.
Read radical news here
Is there actually a difference between arrogance, and being supremely confident when you have no reason to be?
Arrogant: "making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud"
Why yes, yes that does sound like practically everything we've heard from anyone influential at sony regarding, well, anything that's come out since the Playstation. Playstation 2 was supposed to be the god box, the supercomputer. It fell DRAMATICALLY short of the announced specifications. Playstation 3 is too cheap. PSP is a fantastic value and UMDs are highly desirable. Blah blah blah.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't care how confident those people are, PR folks have got to put at least a LITTLE thought into what they are saying and how it will be interpreted. Quotes like "$600 is too cheap!" don't sound remotely like a statement of confidence on paper.
I wouldn't expect them to say otherwise. If they admitted that Blu-Ray was in any way flawed, the non-Sony content providers would be much slower to adopt the standard (if at all).
What do you mean subjects us to? I've heard of this site, but was never any way forced to see it.
So they tried a really lame advertising campaign, and it backfired. I don't get all the indignation and nerd-rage over it, like they violated your rights or something.
I don't get the anger or hostility in general. I think the PS3 is overpriced and kind of dumb, so I just dont buy one. Maybe one day I will, but I have no strong personal feelings towards it one way or another. It's just a consumer product, and not something I in any way need.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
So you are not a hardcore gamer. That's okay. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact it is probably the more healthy way to be (and I say this, of course, as a gamer myself.)
But if you are among the 'core, then you have to understand that Sony is pure fucking evil. In fact, in the gaming market, they're significantly more evil than Nintendo. Whether you believe they're the primarily responsible party, they definitely committed grievous harm to sales of the Dreamcast by making an early announcement of bogus PS2 specs which they had to know were fraudulent, and their utter and complete arrogance around the PS3 and PSP frankly angers many of us.
I think most people are offended by people who are too big for their britches. No one is impressed by the big turd, no matter how big the bowl is.
There are of course numerous reasons to despise sony. The rootkit fiasco is near the top of the list. And Sony's inability to build a reliable optical drive, coupled with their minuscule warranties. And of course, my personal #1, their summoning satan all over Lik-Sang, which was bar none my favorite videogame addon crap store, and just about everyone else's too.
In general, Anger and hostility are counterproductive anyway, so it's good that you don't feel them. But not being able to understand them is a bit inexplicable to me.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Peripherals such as the EyeToy were mentioned as 'making the PS3 disappear from the equation'
Ummm... How does an overpriced and underutilized webcam accessory accomplish that? And what does that have to do with the price of the base system?
The system's cost won't be changing for some time now
Then neither will the sales figures.
They eventually hope to have 100% of online-connected users on the service
Sony, Microsoft, and even Nintendo need to understand something...
A lot, probably even the majority, of casual gamers, don't want the whole live/home/online "experience". We want to pop in a game and waste a few hours to unwind between getting home from work/school and having dinner.
I don't care if the world knows how much I rock (or suck) at the newest games. I don't want trinkets and scenery and furniture for a virtual apartment. I don't want to spend time doing anything beyond slaying dragons, drag-racing through densely populated urban areas, slappin' hos, and getting the little colored blocks lines up just right so they go "bleep" and vanish.
My style of gaming doesn't fit Sony's ideal revenue model. Too bad - Give me what I want, or you don't get any revenue from me.
arrogance is not the feeling I get from them in person. These people are, instead, supremely confident in their products and services.
Trying to tell people what they want to buy doesn't count as confident. It counts as arrogance.
People generally have some sense of shame and humility, and in live meeting, few people will come off as truly arrogant. That doesn't make the company itself any less so.
I'll repeat myself - Give me what I want, or you don't get any revenue from me. If Sony responds to that by trying to explain to me why I really want what they have, you have arrogance, not confidence.
It's ok though, Wii is worth it if only for the first party titles.
Just like with N64 and Gamecube, there were plenty more shelves at EB stocking PSX, and then PS2 titles - but most of those are just filler crap. We're talking about dogshit like American Chopper: The Video Game.
I read an interesting article a while back about Nintendo's position and strategy as an innovative force. They continually try to invent new genre's, and capitilize as they grow, then leave them once mature. Sony and MSFT are focused solely on those mature genres. They'll deliver a very highly polished FPS, or racing game, etc, but wont risk something new.
Nintendo has to do this to stay in business, they focus on cheaper to develop games, and building new genres - the games usually have simplistic graphics, cutting down dev time, for example.
Consider the platformer - a genre nintendo largely defined with Super Mario Bros (and arguably invented with Donkey Kong), and redefined for 3D with Super Mario 64 - yet they currently have nothing in this market, it's too mature and full of competition. How many games would you consider a "Mario Kart" clone?
Sort of a tangent, but basically Nintendo doesn't need to be #1, and nintendo can survive some lack of support from third parties as long as they keep coming up with new stuff. Look at how the DS is taking off, against the PSP which I'm willing to admit is technically advanced. The "gimmick" of the touchscreen has opened whole new genre's of gaming - and this is the whole point of the wiimote.
If the wiimote spawns some successful new genres of videogaming, as it likely will, you'll see similar devices and plenty of clones of those games on Xbox and PS3. The genre will mature, get its rigid fanbase unopposed to change (there is no room for innovation in the FPS genre, the fans are too hardcore and will reject anything that isnt by-the-numbers), and Nintendo will move on.
They surely fail sometimes (Virtual Boy), but the fact that they are a company based on invention means they can keep going and succeed, where Sega failed miserably (Sega being merely another manufacturer, like Sony and MSFT).
Basically, they don't really compete with Sony and Microsoft at all. Sony and MSFT manufacture, Nintendo invents.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Not much they can do about it now, this was one of the reasons Microsoft wanted to get the 360 out so early. They had some time all alone by themselves, and time to let their lineup mature. There are so many systems out now that a game designer seems to shy away from an exclusive and tries to get on as many systems as possible.
My take is that Sony just has to own-up to what they have. Plug away at their own pace, try to get their games to really take advantage of the hardware and hope for something to stick. If I remember correctly, the N64 was declared an initial loser when compared to the others, but came on strong in the end with some great games that took advantage of their system.
Coming from the "wait and see" crowd, I'd say Sony has at least a year and a half after launch before those people start walking away.
I really don't understand why people go on and on about the PS3's price.
It retails for $499 usd
Not $700, not $800, not whatever other made-up numbers people use (although yes, europe got screwed here as usual).
What do you get for that price?
$800 worth of hardware.
Hardware that no other console has. Hdmi, standard high capacity optical drive, user replaceable hard drive, in a package that has had essentially no manufacturing defects.
Yeah, its expensive, but it's a lot of machine for the money. If you don't want to pay for it, don't buy it, but stop acting like sony owes you a cheaper machine.
He's actually 121 dollars too low, if you take the UK launch price of 425 GBP ($821 at today's exchange rate).
I really think they have given up on Europe, they might as well not launch at all at that price, and the only game I was really looking forward to (Gran Turismo 5) is now a 2008 release BEFORE the huge wait for a PAL version.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
This will probably come across as trollish, but this is a serious question - Zonk, what is your love for Sony / the PS3?
"Sony Keynote Offers Hope For PlayStation 3 Fans"
"Today was Sony's day to deliver: and in my opinion they did with flying colours."
"Finally, finally, there seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel for the console."
"Note the first: There may finally be a great reason to buy a PlayStation."
"Your avatar is customizable, and extremely detailed. These is *not* Miis, these are better than Second Life quality digital characters."
"[Little Big Planet] is the reason to buy PlayStation 3." (bolded)
And from this op-ed:
"The element that I want to convey, which I took away from the discussion of Sony's arrogance, was that arrogance is not the feeling I get from them in person. These people are, instead, supremely confident in their products and services."
"I came away from the meeting with a sense of cautious optimism."
"...it's possible the games arm of this particular megacorporation may have put its launch troubles in the rear-view mirror."
Maybe it's just my view of things, but everything *sounds* sugar-coated. Your (Sony) article(s) read more like hype than unbiased reporting.
It's fine if you're personally excited about what goes on, but I think in the interest of full disclosure, you need to say *why* you're so interested. I don't own a PS3; I have seen nothing in these recent articles to indicate, to me, that Sony has taken any steps to change their ways. And yet, you repeatedly say that this is the case.
Why? Because they're implementing a Sony-branded Second Life rip-off? Because of one good game? Because they put their best personal face forward during one meeting?
We've seen this exact pattern before, from a number of companies: nicely worded "promises". Pretty ideas. Friendly faces. The reality of it from Sony has been, consistently, lies and dashed hope. Does meeting these people face-to-face really make you want to forgive and forget so easily?
-lw
Mods: Disagreeing with me != my post Offtopic / Flamebait.
World without hate or war, invaded. Tragic?
Coming in to GDC Sony is in a hard last place in a lot of ways, yet apparently at this talk it sounds like a huge amount of the time is spent on Home, that's a huge win. Avoiding talking about the Blu-ray, price and games for the most part and talking up their new Home is good. Let's forget that GDC is about developers rather then the press, and the fact that they have taken the first steps to turning GDC into the next E3.
But from the sound of this they really got away with something at GDC this year, and kudos for them, too bad most of us are already too jaded to turn back and most developers still find the system a hassle even with this new item. Overall though it sounds like a huge win for Sony at least this week.
Preface: I have 2x NES, SNES, N64, Cube; GBA, SP x2, DS Lite; Dreamcast; 2x PS2, 1 PS2/Slim (gave my PS1 away); 2x PSP; and a PS3. I will be getting a Wii as soon as Paper Mario hits, maybe sooner. I have a solid selection of the best games for all of the above platforms, and I've played (if not finished) just about every SNES and NES game worth playing. I grew up when Atari and Nintendo were big, and am as happy to play an 8-bit game as an HD next-gen game. If that's not "'core", or whatever you kids are calling it, then you're the one with the weaker definition.
That said, you have no clue if you think Sony is "evil". Nor is Nintendo "evil" anymore; whether this is by necessity or choice is irrelevant. The only thing that killed the Dreamcast was Sega's business prowess. Substandard manufacturing, terrible marketing, and making lots of bad choices along the way. I would much rather see them as the third competitor in the console race than Microsoft (because Microsoft is ongoingly evil), but that's not going to happen soon.
Care to share a link to a credible reference?
Care to explain how a company that delivered two massively successful consoles each with a huge library of excellent games is a "big turd"?
And how does Sony/BMG's contractor have anything to do with Sony Computer Entertainment, which is an entirely different---physical and businessological--- subsidiary?
If Lik-Sang failed because they couldn't sell modchips in the UK, then they had more issues than Sony.
Your anger and hatred is misplaced, and more related to a $499-599 pricetag than any real, tangible, logical reason.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
No?
So then why did you buy a Dreamcast?
That's funny. I have over 100 Dreamcast games. Given the console's short lifetime and the pallor of doom cast by SCE, that's not bad at all. And in fact I'd say a much higher percentage of them are worth playing as compared to, say, the first hundred playstation games.
Jesus, what is this, a troll? The mistakes they made with Saturn were thus: It was $100 too expensive, and it pissed off developers because it was hard to use, leading to comments like describing the Saturn as a "pile of chips on a board". In fact Sony is the company that made the latter mistake in the following generation, not Sega; the DC has one nice speedy PowerVR and a very approachable graphics system, and the PS2 has a very complex CPU and a very complex graphics system - they have slightly more power, if any at all, and they are FAR harder to use. Meanwhile, the Dreamcast was not unreasonably priced, not that the PS2 was.
Well, I'll agree with that part. But many of the best games ended up on the Genesis, that's something of a fact. And if you played sports games (not that I did) you needed a Genesis. That really helped them go. Not to mention that Sonic was truly impressive.
Sega made more than their share of mistakes. I don't want to argue that point; it's not defensible to say that they didn't either. But the Dreamcast was a brilliantly executed piece of hardware, and it didn't just die on its own.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Lik-Sang was sued because they sold PSPs in Europe, not mod-chips. The lawsuits (plural) absolutely were bullshit.
I was referring to the saying "big turd in a little bowl", which refers to someone who thinks they are better than they are. Which describes them nicely. However, the bowl is anything but little.
Also, they are definitely a bunch of shits. Just the way they treat their customers is wrong.
Entirely different? You actually believe that? These corporations are created so that the parent corporation can shield itself from harm. That is the beginning and the end of the story. A beneficial (to them) side effect is that very foolish people think they are actually different corporations. But they are not! It's all under the same umbrella, and your failure to hold Sony Corporate accountable for the actions of its subsidiaries underscores the foolishness of the consumer mindset. CONSUME, EARTHLING! CONSUME!
Lik-Sang failed because they couldn't afford to respond to dozens of lawsuits filed in various countries. But don't let the facts get in your way or anything. Incidentally, one of the major complaints Sony had against them was that they were selling consoles and games out-of-region. So basically, Lik-Sang had to die to protect Sony's right to engage in price fixing.
If you don't think that's bad, then I don't think we can even come to an agreement.
Look dude, I have a job. It's not amazingly high-paying but I could afford a PS3 if I liked. I just blew a couple hundred bucks on a car stereo when a fifty dollar unit would have let me listen to music, because it had a few extra features that I could live without. I'm not buying one even if they halve the price. You get me? You can talk all the ignorant shit you want, but you don't fucking know me, so don't presume to tell me what's on my mind.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't have time to find references for the other stuff you ask (and if you can't remember the fake polygon claims which both Sony and Microsoft released, you're not much of a gamer), but this is just plain wrong:
Not being able to sell modchips in the UK is not what killed Lik Sang. Lik Sang was not able to defend against multiple lawsuits started by Sony all over Europe and was thus forced to go out of business.
They never had a chance to defend themselves because Sony started so many lawsuits that they could not afford fighting them, even if they had a chance of winning. I don't care what you think, that's just plain evil.
As was reported on slashdot a few days ago, Kotaku was "blackballed" by Sony for reporting on rumors about Sony Home. Even though Sony and Kotaku are back on speaking terms now, the following is quite amusing:
e v-hands-me-my-balls-242974.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/oddities/gdc07-warhawk-d
GDC07: Warhawk Dev Hands Me My Balls
There was this moment, just seconds after I sat down between Phil Harrison and David Karraker, when the entire table of bloggers, PR people and developers at Sony's Blogger Congress were quiet.
Then Dylan Jobe, Warhawk game director for Incognito, spoke up.
"Before we get started, I have something for Brian."
I noticed Jobe had a small box on the table in front of him. He is a big fan of Kotaku and was impressed with what the site did last week over the whole Sony Home dealio.
So he said he wanted to give me a present to thank me. Opening the box he revealed: A set of brass balls.
But if you are among the 'core, then you have to understand that Sony is pure fucking evil.
If ya think sony is pure evil... you may want to go back to history class. Or english and find out what the word evil is. Sony has been dumb, has been over aggresive, has been a hype machine and under achiever but "evil" is a stretch. Or did I miss the news story where Cell chips are made from African Orphan brains?
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Then - as promised by their leadership ("we'll firewall it at the PC!") they embedded a rootkit on music CDs. This criminal act, followed by their arrogant defense of this action, proved to me that they are nothing more than the lowest level of corporate scum.
So I made a choice - no more money to Sony. Hasn't hurt a bit; I've spent freely on electronics and entertainment and don't miss Sony a bit.
Those who haven't learned yet are doomed to suffer at Sony's hands - Sony hasn't learned their lesson yet. They don't have a public relations problem, they have a corporate ethics problem. I don't see anything that indicates any change in this situation at any time in the forseeable future.
Preface: I have 2x NES, SNES, N64, Cube; GBA, SP x2, DS Lite; Dreamcast; 2x PS2, 1 PS2/Slim (gave my PS1 away); 2x PSP; and a PS3. I will be getting a Wii as soon as Paper Mario hits, maybe sooner. I have a solid selection of the best games for all of the above platforms, and I've played (if not finished) just about every SNES and NES game worth playing. I grew up when Atari and Nintendo were big, and am as happy to play an 8-bit game as an HD next-gen game. If that's not "'core", or whatever you kids are calling it, then you're the one with the weaker definition.
Alright, cards on the table time. For some oddly contrived reason you are faced with a choice as to which company: Sony or Nintendo, is allowed to have ever existed in the gaming market. Which would you choose? I can tell you that as someone with a similar background(although I don't own a PSP or a PS3), I'd choose Nintendo, because Sony just doesn't matter as much.
That said, you have no clue if you think Sony is "evil". Nor is Nintendo "evil" anymore; whether this is by necessity or choice is irrelevant. The only thing that killed the Dreamcast was Sega's business prowess. Substandard manufacturing, terrible marketing, and making lots of bad choices along the way. I would much rather see them as the third competitor in the console race than Microsoft (because Microsoft is ongoingly evil), but that's not going to happen soon.
Order of evilness today: Microsoft > Sony > Nintendo
Order of evilness in the late 80s/early 90s: Nintendo > Microsoft > Sony
Except then Nintendo was never really horrible to their customers. The worst thing they ever did was set up those Nintendo authorized repair centers and charge a bit too much for repairs related to the design decision of making the NES load like a VCR. Sony and Microsoft have been comparitively horrible to their customers, especially in recent memory.
Care to explain how a company that delivered two massively successful consoles each with a huge library of excellent games is a "big turd"?
Gah, I hate statements like that. It's stealing credit from Capcom, Konami, Square Enix, Atlus, Take 2, EA, and every third party who made great games and apportioning it to Sony for some fucked up reason. Sony didn't make the playstation, the third parties did.
Because almost none of those games are in-house games. Had Sony not been around, they would've been made for the Gamecube or N64 or Dreamcast or XBox. One of the things I truly hate Sony for is their idiotic fanbase. Mainly because they gave me shit for the better part of a decade for daring to enjoy games with color in them. And they'll also criticize the fuck out of a Nintendo title, while praising another titles that's exactly as derivative of the original Nintendo title.
And how does Sony/BMG's contractor have anything to do with Sony Computer Entertainment, which is an entirely different---physical and businessological--- subsidiary?
Sony media calls the shots within Sony proper. Plus, *always* hold a corporate entity as a whole responsible for the actions of their subsidiaries. If you hate phillip morris, you shouldn't buy Kraft food products.
If Lik-Sang failed because they couldn't sell modchips in the UK, then they had more issues than Sony.
Lik-Sang got knocked out by Sony suing them in dozens of territories for importing PSPs before the release date.
Your anger and hatred is misplaced, and more related to a $499-599 pricetag than any real, tangible, logical reason.
Maybe his is, mine isn't. My anger is placed at the credit-stealing, attention whoring, and sheer arrogance of the company and it's fanbase. I don't want to be associated with playstation fans. I don't want to be associated with Sony. They're fucking thieving scum, and maybe you're ok with that but I prefer to reward the guys who come up with and push the concepts rather than the guy who comes in later, mocks an idea only to copy it and tweak it a tad, then declares it his innovation. Sony needs to be put into their place like Nintendo was. The only way to do that is to not buy the thing until that has occured.
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
Care to share a link to a credible reference?
My thought too. Even though I would hear 13 year old kids in EB badmouthing the DC before the launch, it still managed to have (At that time.) the biggest launch in history and hit 1 million units faster than any other console.
To all the morons who would say, "I can't afford both and the PS2 will be better." I would reply that if they couldn't save a few hundred dollars in a year then they probably shouldn't get either and concentrate on things like buying food.