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."

9 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. Here's my 10 Reasons by Mizled · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
  2. well, duh by Deadbolt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."
    1. Re:well, duh by Lithos · · Score: 5, Informative
      Had to reply to this.. I own all 3 systems and I hate it when people assume they know what they're talking about.

      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. Well there's two problems with this thinking. 1st, it's only $100 more than a 360, if you want to compare what the systems actually include, assuming you're not interested in playing Blu-Ray discs or HD-DVD discs, otherwise, it's $100 cheaper than a 360. Why is this? Because the 360 only comes with a 20 GB HD and no 802.11g support. Let's try and just compare apples to apples.

      One more food for thought item... I realize that the 360 has better online options right now.. but is it $50/yr better? Or $200 - $250 over the life of the console better? That also needs to be figured in the total cost of ownership of either system. The way I see it, total cost of ownership for my 360 (having gotten it on launch day) is $850. $250 for 5 years worth of XBox Live (assuming I keep it for the life of the system) and $200 for the HD-DVD player (because I really do think high def movies are better) and $400 for the console. Whereas the total cost of ownership for my PS3 (having gotten it on launch day) is still only $600.

      I have all 3 systems, and play all 3 systems regularly. I couldn't/didn't want to choose one or two out of the three because I knew it would be torture 1-2 years down the road, once the big exclusives come out. But once I got all 3 and started looking at this objectively, I started feeling more and more like Sony actually does know what they're doing. Now if only someone could send a message to their marketing folk that the PS3 would be cheaper than a similarly decked out 360 and play off of that, maybe their sales would start taking off.
      --
      What's a sig?
  3. Re:Seriously by ArcherB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you've hit the nail on the head here. It's the games that make the console, not the other way around (although more power can mean better games!)

    I think Sony should offer to pay for or at least split the development costs for some heavy hitter games. If Sony could team up with Blizzard, for example, to make a PS3 version of WOW that shares the online world with PC's, it may go a long way toward selling consoles.

    --
    There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  4. Right. Being a happy PS3 owner isn't unusual. by Paradox · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
  5. Uh, no. It really is the price. by androvsky · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  6. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, your narrowed your options down to Nintendo, the good company, whose fine business practices have never done anything to hurt the games industry? In seriousness though, I don't think making choices based on company image will get you very far. Your impression of a company is a tug of war between their PR team, other PR teams, and the media, and not particularly reliable in my opinion. I actually want to buy a Wii more than any of the other two, but that's because it's cool, not because Nintendo is supposedly less evil.

  7. Re:Seriously by king-manic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just a note: Most people don't care a bit about the root kit, lik sang, or the inclusion of blu-ray. only the price and the lack of games would cross the mind of any non geek.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  8. Re:At Least by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's what I've always found weird.

    Slashdot appears to hate the PS3 and love Linux... yet which console runs Linux out of the box as a freaking menu option?


    Why is that weird?

    Let's say that you love ice cream but you hate herpes-sore covered cock. Some dude shows you his herpes-covered cock, but it's also smeared with delicious ice cream. "Hey man, I thought you loved ice cream, you weirdo!" he says as you run screaming.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are