Slashdot Mirror
Still A Rough Road Ahead for the PlayStation 3
TobyToadstool writes "Despite the good news out of GDC last week, it still seems like Sony's new console has some image management to do. CNET says that the PlayStation 3 is 'the most unwanted console in recent memory' and asks 'why is the PS3 so undesirable?' They specifically question the company's wisdom in emphasizing the power of the console. Their impression is that this invites developers to neglect gameplay, in favour of investing in graphics. Likewise, Gamespot is running a piece suggesting ten ways to make the PS3 worth buying. A lower price is just one of the suggestions with exclusives, and the need for online standardization, following close behind. Looks like Sony still has its work cut out."
It's not "unwanted", people just don't want to pay the price. I'm more than half the people out there who have decided not to get it have decided such because of price and not one of the other reasons listed in TFA.
I don't know if 10 or so years ago counts as recent memory, but IIRC, the Atari Jaguar was the most unwanted console that I can think of!
Doh!
10) Cost
9) Cost
8) Cost
7) Cost
6) Cost
5) Cost
4) Cost
3) Cost
2) Cost
1) Wii > PS3
Bite my shiny metal ass.
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
Seriously people he/she is making a valid comment.
I woulnt say its "the most unwanted console in recent memory". Its just too expensive for most casual gamers. Like the 3DO, Jaguar, and others it may be a great system but you need a large user base to survive.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
No one thing is killing the PS3. Sony has screwed up on multiple fronts:
* no games. Can anyone who doesn't have a PS3 name two games currently available for it not available anywhere else?
* halfhearted online/multiplayer. The 360, MS device or no, has set the bar, and whether or not you think it's high enough, the PS3 doesn't come close to it.
* bad word of mouth. Hardcore gamers are turned off due to the lack of games and crappy multiplayer.
* marketing. What the HELL is with the PS3 ads? Sony thinks no one will ever use the full power of the console? Even to non-gamers, they sound clueless.
* nothing new. While the PS3 is technically the same generation as the 360 and Wii, what is it offering that they don't? The 360 does HD (which doesn't only mean 1080p, so don't start) and has solid online chops. The Wii is retro, uses a new controller scheme, and is accessible for non-gamers. The only thing the PS3 does well so far is HD, and the difference between it and the 360's HD is practically subjective.
The price, frankly, is retardedly high. Without anything new or awesome games, a console that's 50% higher than its nearest competitor isn't going to sell.
However, this isn't necessarily how it's always going to be. Sony can still save their baby by correcting these screwups, and gamers want the PS3 to be cool because they want awesome games. Maybe in two years we'll all own PS3s and laugh at the thought that one day we openly scorned the chunky thing.
"Honey, it's not working out; I think we should make our relationship open-source."
I don't think you should use the word "logic" in that statement...
Unless you say "Follow that to its logical fallacy of slippery slope, and we should all be playing pong"
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
As can be seen here http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/03/09 Sony have just unveiled two big new draws for the PS3. I think the price is still prohibitively high, but I think gradually they'll manage to grow the userbase if they can keep releasing stuff like this.
"Everlasting peace will come to Earth when the last man kills the last but one." - Adolf Hitler
you buy one first!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Problem is, they're not here yet: Gran Turismo 5, and the new installments of GTA, Zone of Enders, Final Fantasy, Metal gear Solid, and other great PSX franchises. I have no interest in the 360, and while I think the Wii is fun as hell, it's the PS3 that will get all the good high-end Japanese games from Konami, Square/Enix, and the like.
In the meantime, I'm kicking back and enjoying Guitar Hero/GHII with occasional progress on completing Gran Turismo 4.
I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
Lik-sang.
Okay, maybe it's hyphenated or a compound, but still. Even without price being a factor, I'm still pissed that I can't easily import all the cool shit I didn't get a chance to buy the last time I was in Asia.
...then emo teens across America should be buying them up like hotcakes. FINALLY, someone who understands! and he plays reasonably entertaining video games too!!
Hot topic should have spotted the niche in the market long ago...
Play-Asia? I'm staying out of the whole Sony vs. Lik-sang business, but it's not as if that was the only import site in town.
This is not the first $600 system that I have purchased and I am pretty sure it won't be the last. Yeah, the Neo-Geo system was not the most commercially successful system, but I am still happy I bought one. (BTW, try buying a AVS cart on ebay right now.) It's not cheap, but frankly I would prefer to spend a bit more now and have a system that will have a lifespan longer than 3 1/2 years (Original XBox, looking at you here!).
I'm puzzled as to why it's not more popular. I heard you can attack Giant Enemy Crabs at their weak point for MASSIVE DAMAGE.
Also, it has real-time weapon switching! Take that Wii Remote!
Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
According to Sony, it's because their Supply Chain Management is very good. For some unknown reason, that doesn't explain the low-market share though. I'm sure their PR department will think of a better excuse next time. Maybe not.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
Yeah.
The PS3 is probably used only slightly less than my cable box. It's a fantastic DVD player, media player, Blu-ray player, and game console. Once I got over the price, I took the plunge and grabbed it. It's on for a few hours every night, in either linux or crossbar.
What's really ironic is that Sony has made the most open console, and no one seems to want to mention this. If it weren't so expensive, we'd see an incredible surge of hack activity on the product. With a free and fairly good linux distro already available, the sky is really the limit. Not to mention that with a quick conversion it plays nearly any media I download. It also uses Bluetooth peripherals. No overpriced-piece-of-crap microphones or obnoxious cable adaptors. All my mice and keyboards already work with it.
What's most frustrating about being a PS3 owner is that everyone immediately assumes you've wasted your money. If you explain that the PS3 has been a terrific experience, they immediate assume you either: a) Don't have a Wii and are bitter or b) are a Sony shill.
At least Motorstorm is out now. When people come over and I beep on the PS3, their snide comments quickly fall off as they watch a few rounds. And I actually have people coming over to play VF5, which was the first time I had friends want to check out my PS3.
I hope with the upcoming price drop and Home (and Little Big World) on the way, Sony will get the PS3 back on track, because there really is a lot to like about it.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Yeah, everyone pissed all over the PS2 when it came out because of stupid Sony execs over hyping the console, but when it launched most games looked worse than Dreamcast games, but it was more expensive.
Everyone I know, from average gamers to low-level systems programmers WANT a PS3. Badly. The gamers because they love the PS2 and all the great exclusives it had, and expect the PS3 to do the same, but with far better graphics. They don't follow gaming news quite enough to hear stupid quotes from various Sony execs, they're too busy playing Oblivion. Only problem is they can't afford the stupid thing, which is too bad since I know they'd go apeshit over Home.
The programmers I know want to play with the Cell, myself included. From everything I've heard, it's living up to the hype, even if you only get to play with 6 of the vector units on the PS3. It's also living up to the "pain in the ass to program" stories too, but that just makes some of us want to take a shot at it even more. But that's still not enough motivation to spend $500 - $600 to screw around with it, even though the programmers could afford it.
The PS3 is getting more and more exclusives every day (LittleBigPlanet, God of War 3 just got announced), and that's all it really needs now that they announced Home (and rumble too, I guess). The price really is the sticking point. I have a good friend who's a huge God of War fan, but there's no way in hell he's getting a PS3 in the next four years, he only got the PS2 last year. They won't be able to drop the price fast enough over the PS3's lifespan for it to ever approach PS2 sales numbers, but it can compete with the Xbox 360.
For its time, the Jaguar was quite a system (as was the Lynx, Atari's 16-bit color handheld). Alien v. Predator on the Jaguar, released in 1994, was way ahead of its time and for several years was one of the best console games. See Wikipedia for screenshots. Of course, this was the only game that was any good for Jaguar which doomed the system.
Get us a game worth playing, and we'll want to buy it.
Should be a no-brainer.
Maybe Sony should try to hire some people from Nintendo. Nintendo has to have somebody with a clue who thinks that powerful hardware would be nice to run a good game on.
is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
The funny thing is, if many programmers get a PS3 for that purpose and don't buy any games, Sony's losing a heck of a lot of money.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
If anyone actually still wants one but can't find one, last time I was at a Walmart I saw two, and at Costco, I saw over 21 of them (I did a conservative count)
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
It doesn't need exclusives announced, it needs exclusives released. It could also use a better PR staff, a lower price, and some concrete news about the sore topic of Killzone.
Eventually it will have most of those things, but it could really use them now.
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
Seriously guys, get a life; the competition in the console market between Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo is not a battle between good and evil...or good, neutral and evil; it's a competition between competing systems to get you to buy their system for money. This is about business, these aren't competing political ideologies or antyhing; just high-tech toys for both grown-ups and children. Buy the system that has what you want (both in terms of games and hardware features) and don't worry about the company behind it. None of these companies cause genocides or anything like that. As for the article itself, I'd say that the PS3 really isn't doing that badly; the idea that it is is really just hype, it's not selling as well as the Wii, that's true, but the generation is young.
Nintendo really took the correct approach by concentrating on gameplay, and not pure technical chops. The Wii is just fun to play for everyone in the family: from my 9yo niece to my 80yo grandmother.
I've been looking for additional Wii consoles for people at work, and they're really hard to find (I'm not paying inflated prices on eBay, sorry.) A PS3, on the other hand, I could pick up pretty much anytime.
Chip H.
For me, it's all about the media. I would have bought three PS3s by now at their current cost if they could provide a better media experience than XBMC. You'd think of all companies, Sony would "get it." However everything that I've read indicates that the media center in the PS3 is even worse than what's in the 360 - which is almost hard to believe, considering the piss-poor offering of the 360 media center.
I pledge right now to any Sony exec reading this - you provide me with a better XBMC than XBMC and I guarantee you two PS3s in my home. Until that time, fahgetaboutit.
In particular, it's not about the price. Sure, if the price is lower by the time there are some games I like, I won't complain, but even if the price were $100 I probably still wouldn't buy one now -- I'd have a $100 box with no games I wanted to play, not much of an improvement over a $600 box with no games I want to play.
Sony is pitching the PS3 as a high-tech state of the art HD game system to justify its premium price, yet it can't do something absolutely basic--scale all output to either of the major HD standards, 1080i or 720p. Many older 1080i HD monitors will not accept 720p input at all. Other sets may offer scaling but not do a good job of it. This is something that every other HD output device on the market can do. Any cheap upscaling DVD player, HD cable box, or HD PVR can do it. The XBox 360 most certainly can do it. If this is really a deficiency of the PS3 hardware, then Sony needs to update the hardware.
I was ready to buy a PS3 until I learned about this deficiency.
> * no games. Can anyone who doesn't have a PS3 name two games currently available for it not available anywhere else?
... yet. Kind of like when the PS2 launched.
Resistance Fall of Man
Motorstorm
There are others of course, but the point is there are not enough games out there
- sigs are for wimps.
Fast forward to November. There are quite a few major PS3 releases and Blu Ray movies outnumber HD DVD by 30% and outsell them 3:1. And now Sony knocks $100 off their console, finally kills PS2 and launches an insanely intensive marketing campaign, showing off upcoming games in all their "impossible on Xbox 360" glory. Kids all over the US and Europe beg their parents for a PS3. Parents cave in (given that they'll also be able to use it to watch Blu Ray titles).
Since the console still does not have easy availability everywhere for those that want one (Amazon had them in stock for several days then sold out again), how does anyone know if people want them or not?
Currently, it would seem people want them because when Amazon gets them in stock the sales rank rises well about the XBox 360 (though not the Wii). Until there is constant stock everywhere I don't think anyone can be judging what demand for the console really is.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sony felt that they owned the video game market. They should have seen the first signs when the Nintendo DS dominated the Sony PSP. Just as Nintendo became arrogant and thought they would own the console market forever, Sony will feel the harsh penalty of hubris themselves.
Sony decision to include the BluRay drive was based on the belief that PS2 owners would flock to the stores to buy anything with Playstation on the name. No matter the cost. And yet PS3s sit on store shelves, gathering dust. Greed is the irrational pursuit of money. Businesses are about the pursuit of money, but in order to be successful they have to balance their desire with common sense. Sony became greedy and lost their common sense.
Anyone who talks how many great Sony exclusives will be available, is clearly deluded. Sony exclusive after exclusive is going to the Xbox 360 as well (Assassin's Creed, Virtual Fighter 5, Armored Core 4). Big games released on both consoles (Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion, F.E.A.R., GRAW 2) are being released months ahead of time on the Xbox 360 before being released on the PS3. There are credible rumors of Metal Gear Solid 4 being released on the Xbox 360 and Final Fantasy is getting kind of tired. God of War 3 and Grand Turismo 5 will be in development for years. Motorstorm is a racing game in one environment and Resistance:Fall of Man has to hold off Gears of War, Lost Planet and Halo 3 on its own. What will the PS3 have available for Christmas 2007 that isn't being released on the Xbox 360?
The PS3 will not only have to face the wrath of the 360, but it will face the vicious tide of the Nintendo Wii. Half the price. Proper motion sensing with rumble. The Wii is an elegant fighter with not an ounce of fat against the bloated husk of the Playstation 3. Released at the same time as the PS3, the Wii has sold over 3 times as many consoles.
In the UK right now, you can walk into Game, Gamestation, Curry's, HMV... basically any of the major high street game retailers and slap down a small deposit (£20 in most shops) to be guaranteed - yes, that's what every shop window poster says, guaranteed - a PS3 on launch day.
On the other hand, you still need a deposit to get hold of a Wii, three months after launch, and there's no guarantee whatsoever of when you'll actually be able to pick the thing up.
The article is right - in the UK at least, the PS3 is a truly unwanted console. They should have waited until market penetration of HDTVs was above 1%...
You must think in Russian.
The programmers I know want to play with the Cell, myself included. From everything I've heard, it's living up to the hype, even if you only get to play with 6 of the vector units on the PS3. It's also living up to the "pain in the ass to program" stories too, but that just makes some of us want to take a shot at it even more. But that's still not enough motivation to spend $500 - $600 to screw around with it, even though the programmers could afford it.
I don't know about you, but for my own part as a programmer the last thing that I want to deal with when I am trying to get a piece of software out the door, be it a game or something else, is to be wrestling with the finicky hardware on the chip. The problem with PlayStation, from a development standpoint, is and has always been poor library support for all of the advanced hardware features, forcing each company to develop their own hardware abstraction layers and massively adding to the cost of PlayStation development. Imagine how much more productive PlayStation developers would be if they had something like DirectX available on PlayStation? As for spending $500-$600 dollars on a console that I don't have time to play anyway? No thanks. I would be happier with my money earning interest or purchasing something else instead.
Disclaimer: I'm easily twice the age of the average Slashdotter.
We just (finally) got our hands on the Nintendo Wii. We'd bought it for our daughter; but after just trying the Wii Sports... I am completely blown away. As some of you will probably point out, the graphics only go to 480P; but actually playing it - you really feel like this is the next generation of how home gaming systems. It just seems so amazing.
It seems to me like Sony AND Microsoft, going with HD versions of the same old thing (and yes, I have seem the 360 on an HD television), have totally missed the boat. Nintendo bet heavily on being innovative, and they've scored big time. But Sony has, in addition to missing the boat, decided to shoot itself in the foot a few times for good measure.
#DeleteChrome
You insensitive clod! *I* have a herpes/dairy-product covered Love Missile.
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
...according to your logic.
Microsoft's done much worse.
None of the current PS3 titles interest me enough to make me want to go buy the console. As soon as there are a few games I want to play, I'll go buy one. Doesn't get much simpler than that, and I imagine I'm not alone.
It's not just the lack of good quality games, or the fact that most of us don't have an HDTV set that's bigger than 40 inches (or even HDTV - did you know 2/3 of people who own HDTVs lack HDMI cables and are actually watching 480p resolution on their 720p and higher res HDTVs?), or even the price.
It's just not that interesting.
Wake me when they fix all these things and HDTV 1080p 50 inch sets retail for $300. Then I might buy one.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
If you take into account just one of the following:
$50 x 4 years = $200
HD-DVD drive = $200
Wireless Adapter = $100
Base cost of of the XBox 360 20GB = $400
Base cost of PS3 base = $500
Not to mention the PS3 has better backwards compatibility, less hardware failures, less noisy.
This will probably be modded overrated, considering the huge numbers of Microsoft fanboy mods.
Region-encoding. Seriously, Sony underestimates how much US and EU players want to play Japan-only games - even if they only have subtitles.
But, hey, let Nintendo and xBox360 eat your shorts if you must, and keep pushing Blu-Ray on a crowd that could care less about it, if you must.
Just don't expect us to shell out $600 plus $60 a game for it.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The funny thing is, if many programmers get a PS3 for that purpose and don't buy any games, Sony's losing a heck of a lot of money.
Less then most would think. I doubt sony will take a permanant loss for each machine. Remember they fab almost the entire machine in house. Any improvement in yeild or raw cost reducation goes striaght into their pocket. The Ps2 lost a little money initially and was profitable a few months after launch (according to sony). Given how much deja vu we all have of their current launch (hype, slightly underwhelming product, high price, no games of merit, strong compitition with a head start), I doubt they've shifted strategy much.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
re:""Right now, it's about as hard to get a PS3 for launch as it is an orange in California"
HA - fucker hasn't seen what happened to the citrus crops in CA this year.
I don't care if the second coming of Christ is an exclusive for the PS3. I'm not paying that much money for a machine that just plays videogames and movies.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
... is a WiiMote! ;)
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
That's a very fair assesment from the game developer's point of view. Sony is apparently giving out the good libraries to third-party developers now, but I suspect "good" is relative. However, if you're a hobbiest and want to play with several very fast vector processors for a limited scope but very demanding app, the PS3 is the cheapest and easiest way to go.
Around here (Canada) you still can't find the 20GB model anywhere and the 60GB model is $700.
At that price your market is a small group of early adopters.
Other than that. The console is fine, lots of power for years to come, next generation outputs, Blu Ray. Lots of good stuff that makes it lasting in the market.
Sony marketing/PR is done by absolute morons but still that really doesn't matter. In the end it comes down to price.
The last console I bought was Coleco Vision, but I am thinking of getting one of these when they get cost reduced a bit.
Depends on what features you want in a game console, and what kind of 'entertainment' system you think you are getting. For me the kickers are BluRay, WiFi, and game availability...including PS2 titles. As an Xbox and Gamecube gamer...the PS3 has a lot to offer me and doesn't end up costing a lot more.
:-)
For example a BluRay disc player is around $700 most places retail right now. If you really want HD content in a movie and are betting on BlueRay, the PS3 may be a better choice. If you want WiFi...the Microsoft 360 WiFi adapter is $99...which bumps the Xbox 360 Pro total cost before games to $498. So, just a $101 shy of the PS3 (60GB model).
Games are indeed hit and miss on the PS3, but "Resistance" is a nice game overall..."Elder Scrolls IV" is out 3/20...and games like "Assassin's Creed" is coming out as a cross-release later this year. But, I have the entire list of PS2 and PS1 games available to me...and all the network play for the PS2 games works too. And honestly I'm interested in the "SOCOM" multiplay gaming and stuff like "Final Fantasy".
But there is another hidden cost to consider too...Xbox 360 Gold subscription has an ongoing cost. PS3's online service doesn't.
Overall I think that the PS3 was a good choice for me. I did consider the 360 for a long time...and "Gears of War" is really tempting. But I need a console in this for the long haul, and honestly I think that Microsoft will release a Xbox 450 or some other degree at a whim to lure people into their services.
I'm gettin' a PS3!
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
I am a programmer, and I love good movies. I happen to own a large 1080p display because I have poor eyesight. I recently purchased a PS3 for several reasons. This is my first game console, and I intend to enjoy it for a few years at least. I really like the look and sound of BlueRay movies. I am also a programmer. I like Linux, and I want to play with the Cell processors. The thought that Sony pays more to make them than they cost gives me a little thrill. The price of the console over its expected lifetime is not excessive in my mind. The ability to upgrade the hard drive will be a nice feature, especially in the future when 2.5" HD store >300GB. To the people who still want to punish Sont for the root kit incident, I think they should get over it. People come and go, and punishing a corporation for a single act probably doesn't touch the person who made the bad decision. Now, as for the PS3, Linux supercomputer with the Cells, $600 for the 60GB wireless version is not a lot of money for a linux machine with 1080p graphics, Gb ethernet... So for the uses I purchased the PS3 for, I am happy. I can play the several games I purchased with the console. I can watch the several BD movies I purchased, and I can program the box under Yello Dog Linux to my hearts content. In time there will be more games, more movies, and expanded hardware support in Linux. The only aspect of this that I am religeous about, is that I hate Microsoft and absolutely did not want to buy an xbox. No matter what Sony has done in the past, my feelings about them are MUCH better than my feelings about Microsoft. I am happy now, and expect to be happy in the future, and I am glad I bought the PS3. In fact I have a spare under the bed. :-)
Listen buddy, I have a PS3 dev kit sitting on my desk at work and it is my waking nightmare. Let me put this to you very plainly:
Its cute little SPE's are useless for running Havok physics. Try to imagine porting a major title to the PS3 when you're blowing away all your resources on Havok. It doesn't have the same flexible memory architecture as the 360, no massive on-die DRAM cache on the GPU, and it pushes less poly's to boot!
Now try to imagine you're not a programmer (our system programmers adore this little box for its wackiness) but a producer. You have to meet deadlines- and you've got nothing but poor test kits that are counter-intuitive for QA and horrible technical flaws to deal with.
Is that your idea of fun? Do you have any idea how amazingly progressive and helpful 360 is in terms of consoles? John Carmack didn't say it was easier than PC development because someone slipped him a few bills- he was serious.
#1997
* 349,000 DVD-Video players shipped in the U.S. (About 200,000 sold into homes.)
* 900 DVD-Video titles available in the U.S. Over 5 million copies shipped; about 2 million sold.
* Over 500,000 DVD-Video players shipped worldwide.
* Around 330,000 DVD-ROM drives shipped worldwide with about 1 million bundled DVD-ROM titles.
* 60 DVD-ROM titles (mostly bundled).
# 1998 * 1,089,000 DVD-Video players shipped in the U.S. (Installed base of 1,438,000.)
* 400 DVD-Video titles in Europe (135 movie and music titles).
* 3,000 DVD-Video titles in the U.S. (2000 movie and music titles).
* 7.2 million DVD-Video discs purchased.
# 1999 * 4,019,000 DVD-Video players shipped in the U.S. (Installed base of 5,457,000.)
* Over 6,300 DVD-Video titles in the U.S.
* About 26 million DVD-ROM drives worldwide.
* About 75 DVD-ROM titles available in the U.S.
# 2000 * 8.5 million DVD-Video players shipped in the U.S. (Installed base of 13,922,000.)
* About 46 million DVD-ROM drives worldwide.
* Over 10,000 DVD-Video titles available in the U.S.
* Belgium: 100 thousand installed base
* France: 1.2 million installed base
* Germany: 1.2 million installed base
* Italy: 360 thousand installed base
* Netherlands: 200 thousand installed base
* Spain: 300 thousand installed base
* Sweden: 120 thousand installed base
* Switzerland: 250 thousand installed base
* UK: 1 million installed base
http://www.allformp3.com/dvd-faqs/19.htm
The PS2 launched lacked a lot of games, specially it didn't have a lot of *good* games (anybody remember "The Bouncer"?)
At the start, one of the main complaints was that people were just using the PS2 as a DVD player, and I hear the same for the PS3.
Sure the competitive landscape is different, but there are certainly a lot of parellels.
- sigs are for wimps.
How can you get your own code on a ps3 as a hobbiest ?
My Transformation Website
Kindle Books http://www.catprog.org/rev
Interactive CYOA http://www.catprog.org/st
1: Rumble
One reason I play my PS2 more than my PS3.
2: Media management
More visualizations, browsing etc
3: multi-tasking
There is no excuse for forcing me to wait for a download to finish to continue browsing.
4: Guitar Hero controller
Another reason I play the PS2 more than PS3.
5: Fun multi-player games
Why I play my friend's Wii more than my PS3.
6: Full access to hardware under linux
A major reason I bought the PS3, and the reason I haven't bothered installing yet.
There's more, but I'm tired.
-John Fenley
A friend in europe who wanted to buy one tried and couldnt, turns out his local store sold out of PS3... 5x over. Between 1 and 2 million units going to Europe yet demand is expected to match 5million units. Seems people think its desirable. Blurays latest sale figures (thats sale not counting the freebies sony sent out) is showing Bluray is growing faster than DVD did. With direct comparison of dual titles showing people buy BD 2x over HDDVD, seems people find that desirable. Once again a PS3 title is in the #1 spot in japan, once again... seems like people find it desirable. The only people who seem to have issues with the PS3 is GameSpot, not to surprising when you see their forums are filled with outrage over their constant PS3 slagging. Is the PS3 perfect? Nope, not even close but with europes demand passing 15x that of the Wii id say a few people want them.
The Wii version, because it's novel and more fun?
Yeah, unwanted is a very harsh and unrealistic idea. With the price point and lack of solid titles at launch it's going to be slow. Sony predicted this, and if you notice they are still supporting the ps2 quite well during this slow start. The three main problems are: Price Point is to high Lack of Killer Games Lack of HD TV's in general public to take full advantage of the hardware's visual capabilities. I might be buying one soon so I can make sure I have the extra hardware for the ps2 bc... ::shrug::
- Story is about the PS3 CHECK!
- Story is negative CHECK!
- Story has a childish tag CHECK!
- Story is submitted by Zonk CHECK!
- Zonk is still an editor here CHECK!
IIRC, the Atari Jaguar was the most unwanted console that I can think of!
The Atari Panther was even MORE unwanted than that. Even Atari execs didn't want it, saying "Know what, screw Panther, let's cancel that project and focus our efforts on the Jaguar instead".
I can think of the top three (or two and a half because NG isn't exclusive) as well but what else is there? MGS and FF are good but they alone won't keep a system afloat. Also keep in mind that neither the companies nor the teams behind these games are exclusive to the PS3. Their standing is weaker than it was with the PS2, they've lost big hitters like GTA (multiplatform) and Dragon Quest (DS exclusive). Being the Rolls-Royce of the games industry would make the PS3 the equivalent of the Neo Geo, sure, it's powerful but noone can afford it.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
"And there are many more title for this year too. So before you go rattling off that there are no titles for the PS3, get some perspective on what the XBox360 launch looked like first."
The launch title list for the XBOX360 is irrelevant, because at the time nobody had a choice. If you wanted the next generation, you got a 360.
That's the beauty of being first to market by a wide margin. As long as the PS3 suffers from crappy-lineup syndrome, more and more people who were on the fence will opt for the 360.
I'd rather see Sony do well. I want to see companies able to make expensive cross-platform games knowing that the installed bases together are massive. The more the merrier!
But I was waiting for the PS3 launch, and then on boxing day I picked up a full XBOX360 package (wireless/HD package) on sale for about $399C ($340US). Haven't regretted it for a second.
You know, XENON is really no joke either.
It's important to remember that we work with cross-platform toolkits- the notion of coding a super-optimized solution when porting to a platform with hardly a million units in circulation is a financial impossibility.
Also, it's no fun to stream massive chunks with minimal RAM.
The question remains- is it better for gaming?
"...and I want to be able to play all of my old games..."
Yeah, I hear you! Whenever I want to play an XBox game I think back to the day I got my XBox360 and the representative from Microsoft came to my apartment with a baseball bat and destroyed my old console.
Oh, wait. That didn't happen.
When I want to play my XBox games I just turn on my XBox.
What would prevent you from playing on your old console?
As far as I can see, the *other* main reason the ps3 is facing lukewarm reception is because sony has totally dominated the last 2 generations with the ps1 and ps2, and it's "cool" to be different and back the underdog.
I know i'll be buying one once the price is appropriate.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Since you mention xbox live, you will also need a bluetooth headset, which the cheapest one Sony sells is 60 dollars MSRP.
Then you need to compute the amount of extra power the PS3 uses over the x360, since that is an additional cost.
You also neglected to mention that you get bundled games with most systems sold that the 400 dollar price point. This would add an addition 60 dollars. Also Hexic HD comes free with the xbox 360.
HDMI Cable = $60
Headset = $60
Games = $60
Power x 4 years = $80
Also how much for the PS3 unified friends list available in all games and seemless integration of countless other online features? Does the PS3 have a hardware certification program to ensure that all components automatically work properly online? These things cost money, something that your membership pays for.
That largely depends on the game and the differentiating features. For the record I have an HDTV that does 480p/720p/1080i, and a Wii60 both using component cables.
I bought Marvel Ultimate Alliance for the 360 due to it having online co-op. Some friends did the same, and we got some good 4 player online co-op going. This week I'm getting Tiger Woods 07 for the Wii. Despite not being in HD, I cannot see myself ever going the 'Classic controller' route for a Golf or Tennis game (in fact I sold all my old ones). WiiSports wasn't the end all, be all but it highlighted what is possible and that's a road I will explore at every turn.
Fight Night Round 3 is a fun game and has been lauded for it's graphics. Yes, they are hella nice (especially the ladies), but I caught myself wishing I could play with the Nunchuck instead of the controller. I never once played WiiSports boxing and had the thought... if only this looked more realistic...
WB supports both Blu Ray and HD-DVD. There's no way in heck it'll be HD-DVD only. Pirates, on the other hand, will be BR only because it's a Disney flick, and Disney is BR-only.
Sony is apparently giving out the good libraries to third-party developers now, but I suspect "good" is relative.
There are basically two schools of thought regarding third-party developers, lets call the the Apple and Microsoft approaches respectively.
The Apple way goes something along the lines of, "We will strictly control quality, and thus the public perception of the hardware platform in general, by limiting access to the development tools so that only approved developers who meet quality standards and requirements will be permitted to develop official software for the platform." The corollary to the Apple way goes something like, "If we find that hackers or hobbyists are breaking our locks to do unofficial development then we will send the lawyers after them to aggressively protect our intellectual property." This approach can work to increase the public perception that Apple or whomever has a high quality platform with high quality software at the expense of fewer software titles and higher hardware prices due to economies of scale never being realized on the platform.
Conversely, the Microsoft way goes something along the lines of, "We will allow anyone and everyone to develop software for the platform, even though we know that some people will develop poor quality or crappy applications which may influence the public perception about the platform in general, because the benefits of a larger software ecosystem outweigh the costs of bad PR from bugs and crashes and its cheap so people will buy it anyway." The corollary to the Microsoft theory goes something like, "If we get too many low quality developers, hackers, or hobbyists mucking up the perception of the platform then we will introduce a label program to help customers decide which applications are best for their needs (i.e. Designed for Windows TM") and to assure some minimum level of quality."
You can decide for yourself which approach best serves the public, but Sony has clearly been doing things the Apple way from the start with the PlayStation platform and it will take a lot of effort to shift gears and change the developer perception about the closed shop nature of the PlayStation platform and Sony in general. If you want to understand the kind of attitude Sony brings to the table when working with third parties then just look at their advertising slogans (they are indicative of the general attitude at Sony):
"Sony, like no other" and "Only Sony"
Slogans like that really say it all.
"The Apple way goes something along the lines of, "We will strictly control quality, and thus the public perception of the hardware platform in general, by limiting access to the development tools so that only approved developers who meet quality standards and requirements will be permitted to develop official software for the platform."
Which is obviously why all Apple's development tools and documentation are supplied free with every copy of OS X (including the ones that ship with Macs), can be updated for free from their web-site, and one can join their Apple Developer programme at a base level without paying anything.
"Conversely, the Microsoft way goes something along the lines of, "We will allow anyone and everyone to develop software for the platform, even though we know that some people will develop poor quality or crappy applications which may influence the public perception about the platform in general"
Hence the fact that Microsoft don't supply any development tools with their operating systems irrespective of what version you buy, want (quite a lot of) money for non-crippled versions of all their dev. tools (and charged for the crippled ones until last year), and also charge for all levels of MSDN membership.
Cost of developing professionally for Macs: $599 for a Mac Mini, or nothing if you already own a Mac.
Cost of developing professionally for Windows: Visual Studio 2005 pro at $799, assuming you already have a suitable PC and Windows version (XP Pro is required) to use it with, $300 more if you have to upgrade your OS.
if you'd just done a little checking before posting, you could have avoided making yourself look like a complete wanker.
I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.