Sony Looks to 'Refine' PS3 Price

Via GameDaily a Financial Times interview with with Sir Howard Stringer, Sony's CEO, gives fans the first hope that price cuts may be coming soon. Lauding the Wii's performance in last month's NPD numbers, Stringer says that Sony is looking to 'refine' the PS3's pricepoint. "'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' Mr Stringer said in a video interview. 'That [price cuts] is what we are studying at the moment. That's what we are trying to refine.' Sir Howard said he expected 'energy [in PS3 sales] by Christmas, and then you will begin to see break-out games'. Sony is launching a virtual-world game called Home this year, and up to 30 other games."

Comments

It Needs "Refined"...

[morari]

By about $350...

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MS-06FZ]

That's funny, but just stupid. The PS3 is and always has been worth well more than its price in the store for a lot of reasons that nobody should have to justify anymore. That's ridiculous. Value is subjective. Sure, the PS3 is a fine machine, but to say that it's worth the price - that's something people have to decide for themselves. You could put $3000 worth of computer hardware into a little black box that does nothing but play MP3s - it doesn't matter that it cost you $3000 in hardware, though, because the thing is still worth no more to me than what an iPod costs.

If Sony's doing well at selling the PS3 at its current price point - then fine, good for them. For me, it's too damn expensive. There are much better ways I could spend $600, you know?

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[poot_rootbeer]

That said, people aren't always willing to pay what something is worth

On the contrary, which people are willing to pay for something is the DEFINITION of its worth.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[robbiethefett]

the ps2s are selling like hotcakes because of the price. people realize that "good enough" is, in fact good enough. look at the wii. the graphics are "good enough", the price is right, and there is an interesting and fun-looking way to interact with it. the 360 has been out for what seems like forever now, have sold tons of units, and is established in homes all over america. enter sony, talking some jive about price cuts. it's too little, too late. the next-gen war is over, and microsoft won. the wii isnt really even in the same category as microsoft and sony's offerings, yet it's managed to secure 2nd place in front of the ps3. microsoft aggressively sought market dominance with it's price point, features, and it's wildly popular live service. sony sat on the arrogant notion that the pigs will buy whatever they tell them to at whatever price. you'd think with a huge pre-existing market base and the looming release of halo 3, sony would see that its going to take a lot, lot more than that to steal sales away from microsoft.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony announces release of the $950.00 PS3 Elite.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

a) "nothing but play mp3s" is a stupid comparison, since the PS3 does almost everything you'd expect it to be able to do with its hardware
b) your final point is exactly what I said -- not wanting to spend the money doesn't mean its not worth the money

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

Yes and no -- there are people not willing to pay anything over say $100 for a pink diamond. They're still worth a lot more. Why? Because /enough/ people are willing to pay that much.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it is entirely possible that the Wii will win this generation. The 360 had one heck of a head start, but the Wii is catching up fast.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[twistedsymphony]

I think the point is most of the things that the PS3 can do don't appeal to the people who consider it to be over priced...

Maybe that $3000 MP3 player also plays games and Blu-Rays discs... but it's still just an MP3 player to those consumers who don't want to play games or Blu-Ray. To use another analogy if you were looking at two houses that were equal in all aspects except one had an extra 5 car garage and cost twice as much... if you have no cars, it doesn't matter if those 5 bays are "worth" the extra cost because you have no intention of ever using them, it's just a useless extremity that needlessly drives up the price.

The problem with adding features that drive up the price of your console is that every feature you add shrinks the potential market of people who will find 100% of your features useful and valuable.

Would be PS3 buyers who aren't interested in Blu-Ray see the blu-Ray features valued at $0... would be PS3 buyers who aren't interested in WiFi see the WiFi features valued at $0 etc... Eventually you have a machine that "just plays games" because a large group of gamers don't care about the noise and your console suddenly isn't valued at what you thought it was in the eyes of the consumer.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's ridiculous. Value is subjective.

Value has both an objective and subjective component. The PS3 may not be "worth" its price to you, but it can be shown that it's worth more than is being charged for it because you cannot build a box with equivalent features for less money (oe even as much).

Proprietary software is not worth any price to RMS, but you cannot argue that is it objectively without value.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MS-06FZ]

That's ridiculous. Value is subjective.

Value has both an objective and subjective component. The PS3 may not be "worth" its price to you, but it can be shown that it's worth more than is being charged for it because you cannot build a box with equivalent features for less money (oe even as much).

Proprietary software is not worth any price to RMS, but you cannot argue that is it objectively without value.

No, you're confusing cost and value. Value is defined by what people are willing to pay for an item. It's also very perspective-based. From my perspective value is strictly defined by my own needs. From Sony's perspective, a market price would be governed not only by their cost, but by the supply and demand, competitors' prices, and so on. Cost is just what it costs to make it.

Like I said - if Sony is doing good business with their PS3 right now, then from their perspective their price point is correct. From my perspective it's nowhere close.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[The PS3 Will Fail]

"a) "nothing but play mp3s" is a stupid comparison, since the PS3 does almost everything you'd expect it to be able to do with its hardware"

You completely missed his point. The fact is that if you define the value of the PS3 by the components inside then it is a great value. But no one defines value like that. The potential customer defines the value of the PS3 based on what they can do with it - not the cost of the components inside. It was not a stupid comparison, you just missed the point.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MS-06FZ]

a) "nothing but play mp3s" is a stupid comparison, since the PS3 does almost everything you'd expect it to be able to do with its hardware
b) your final point is exactly what I said -- not wanting to spend the money doesn't mean its not worth the money a: Game consoles have lockout features that keep you from doing whatever the hell you want with the hardware. This potentially decreases the value of the raw hardware - but more precisely, the value of the hardware becomes tied closely to the available software for it. And what I want here is a game console - not a DVD player. I don't trust Playstation hardware with DVD playback, as my PS2 does a really half-assed job of it.

b: To me, it's not worth the money. I'm not going to say Sony "has to" drop their prices because I can see, from a business standpoint, they may not "have to" drop their prices just yet. It may not even be in their best interests to drop price - not just from a strict money-in/money-out standpoint but also in how people perceive the value of their machine. Besides which, with the available supply right now, there are apparently enough people willing to pay the price. But I don't care. The thing is hell of expensive, and as far as I'm concerned, it's not worth it. I'm not alone in that assessment. But the PS3 will come down in price - it's inevitable. Not because it's expensive now but because hardware always decreases in value over time. It's just a matter of when.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[donglekey]

This should not have been modded down. The PS3 is well worth the money to some people, I have seen it with my own eyes. We surfed the internet communally with wireless controllers, we looked at photo albums, we watched T2 on BluRey, and it was all on a 720p projector. Beautiful stuff. The thing is, the PS3 isn't worth (to me) paying $600 to play PS3 games. In my opinion, it isn't even close. Where does that leave them? Maybe in Hi-Def and gadget territory, but they can't compete with two companies who are producing game systems with games good enough to justify their price. It is their own fault? Of course, maybe they shouldn't have changed the firmware and APIs three weeks before the release of the console. OpenGL? in theory. In reality companies have been writing their own rasterizers (openGL and directX clones). For shame. They also told everyone to make million polygon assets because the PS3 could handle it, (you can probably guess that when you put a game together, it cannot handle lots of million polygon models) but that is another layer of fuck up.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[garbletext]

thanks for the unbiased commentary, The PS3 Will Fail!

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[The PS3 Will Fail]

What did I say that was incorrect? Can you debate my point instead of attacking me?

Also - where did I claim I was making unbiased commentary?

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[guilhermesa]

Right, but didn't you missed the point? The PS3 isn't worth the price b/c games/software are what spearheads a popular console, not hardware. We have yet to see extraordinary titles that take advantage of today's hardware capabilities. The two worlds of software/hardware are markets of different tastes and attitudes. Gaming development is the combined effort of artificial intelligence, theatrical storylines, physics, etc. Hardware seems to be much more simple than creating a mind, a plot and a world. Yes, we are capable of producing better games - the problem comes when the industry doesn't create the right incentive for the proliferation of independent development.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite true; you could use that 5-car garage as a workshop or studio, or dress it up and rent it as an apartment. Now, imagine a house with a helicopter pad....

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[LKM]

That's funny, but just stupid. The PS3 is and always has been worth well more than its price in the store for a lot of reasons that nobody should have to justify anymore.

That's a stupid way to evaluate worth. It's like killing somebody and paying his relatives 13 bucks for the dead person's meat. You can't calculate subjective worth by just adding up all the components. If somebody doesn't feel that Motorstorm, Resistance and a Bluray driver are worth 600 bucks, then it's not worth it to him or her.

For the record, I own a PS3 because it's pure techporn. I hardly ever use it, but at least it's a conversation starter, and it has a cf card reader and a nice picture viewer I use to show photos we took during Wii parties.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[LKM]

So value isn't what people are willing to pay, it's what enough people are willing to pay? I don't see the difference. Diamons are a nice example, by the way, since they are objectively worthless. You can't do anything, they have very little resale value, and there are plenty of diamonds in nature. However, marketing and artificial supply constraints are used to increase demand and thus value.

A diamond's value has nothing to do with the diamond itself. It's a glorified rock. The PS3 is just the opposite: Objectively, there's a lot of stuff inside, so it should easily be worth 600 bucks. But most people aren't willing to pay that much for it, so its actual value is lower than the "objective" value.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

I never said I was neutral at all, so get your head out of wherever you've stuck it.

I never claimed the PS3 was worth $600 based on features it doesn't have, but on features it does in fact have, and if you don't want to buy one, then don't. I refused to pay more than $150 for an N64 when that came out and waited until it was that cheap before buying one for example.

That said, Linux is still free on the PS3, I know, I'm running it. Having an HDTV makes all the difference in the world, as does a good receiver with DD/dts support and at least a 5 point speaker system.

Do you think a set of speakers is worth $10,000? A lot of people do it would seem, so they'll keep selling just fine without you. They'll target a specific market and do just fine at it.

PS, since games cost $70 each already, do you really think Sony wants cheap people as primary users? No, didn't think so. Get a clue -- the price will come down some day, but for early adopters, the price was actually lower than it should have been (and almost everyone agreed on that on day 1, including on Slashdot).

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

Since you asked further down, here's one:

You said: "The potential customer defines the value of the PS3 based on what they can do with it" in response to my comment, "the PS3 does almost everything you'd expect it to be able to do with its hardware." Please elaborate one how exactly your point means the PS3 isn't therefore valuable. I agreed with your point implicitly -- and customers get to do nearly everything they'd expect to be able to do with the hardware in question. Only possible exceptions I can think of: 3D accelerated Linux using the video card (although software-based 3D acceleration using the cell isn't off-limits) and things that are possibly illegal in the USA (DVD ripping, etc.).

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

The five car garage analogy is excellent; is the house not worth the higher asking price since it includes the garage? Nobody's making you buy it, but since that feature is valuable to a subset of the population, the price is higher.

I've never claimed the PS3 is for everybody or that Wii users are idiots (as some people have), simply that calling the PS3 overpriced or that it needs a price drop is stupid. What it needs are more excellent games, and personally its already doing very well on that front. If you don't like the games it offers and don't want to use it as a media center or BD/DVD player, then don't buy one.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[The PS3 Will Fail]

"I agreed with your point implicitly -- and customers get to do nearly everything they'd expect to be able to do with the hardware in question."

My point was that the vast majority of potential customers for Sony aren't defining the value of the PS3 in terms of the hardware. They are defining the value of the PS3 based on the games. The current PS3 library does not add outshine the 360. Therefore, the 360 is a better deal - even if the PS3 has better hardware [however you want to define better]. The mp3 device was a good analogy. If you've got one mp3 player that can play mp3s and also do X, Y, Z [where X, Y, and Z are tertiary functions unrelated to playing mp3s] for $600 and another mp3 player that plays mp3s and does X for $400, the second one is the better value.

I think it's rather rude to call someone's analogy "stupid" as well. That type of statement isn't going to advance the discussion any and wasn't that the point of your post? To discuss the issue?

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MikeBabcock]

I'm getting sick of arguments on Slashdot that rely on people not being able to read. Please read what I said, and figure out where I said the PS3 was a better deal than the Xbox. I didn't, so your counter-argument is to the wind since I never disagreed (or agreed), its not even relevant to my point. Please quit replying if you can't actually compose a relevant argument. Thank-you, and goodnight.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[The PS3 Will Fail]

Holy fuck, you're a rude jackass, aren't you?

You said, "a) "nothing but play mp3s" is a stupid comparison, since the PS3 does almost everything you'd expect it to be able to do with its hardware". This is a moronic statement for two reasons:
1) You're a moron and therefore most things that come out of your mouth are bound to be moronic.
2) You missed the idea that the customer isn't evaluating the fucking PS3 based on what hardware is inside the box but is instead evaluating it based on the games versus other games that are available.

You missed the fucking analogy and have proven that you're a fucking child that can't form a cohesive thought. In conclusion, I hope you get diarrhea tonight and that you never breed. Although, given your pathetic life and your inability to act like a fucking human being, I don't think I need to worry about the breeding part. So fuck off and die.

Re:It Needs "Refined"...

[MillionthMonkey]

Most purchasers only used the mp3 player.

oh oh

[Gorkamecha]

When ever a company adds "refined" to a product it tends to get more expensive not less.... Playstation 3, it's for more refined tastes...not like some cheap Wii. Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies! What could possibly go wrong?

Re:oh oh

[sqldr]

1) cheap Wii....
2) Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies...

I sincerely hope that wasn't deliberate..

What was their first hint?

[realinvalidname]

Maybe the fact that a PS3 with one game costs as much as a 360 and a Wii combined?

Re:What was their first hint?

[everphilski]

less games than a xbox360. Cost more than 360 and Wii combined. lame

oh, wait ...

Re:What was their first hint?

[Bobartig]

An x360 without a harddrive is a big mistake. Your forgetting, as Penny-arcade said, "the core system does not exist " Wii + x360 is $50 more than a PS3.. but having ample experience with all three systems, I can say that extra $50 is well worth it for two great systems compared to a ps3.

Re:What was their first hint?

[KDR_11k]

At the time of the PS3 launch the Premium got a temporary pricedrop to 300€ here and the 500€ PS3 was never released here so it was 550€ for a 360 and Wii or 600€ for the PS3. Also these days you get at least one free game bundled with a 360 (that was suspended for the 300€ Premium, of course) so the 400€ isn't just for the console itself.

Re:What was their first hint?

[trdrstv]

An x360 without a harddrive is a big mistake. Your forgetting, as Penny-arcade said, "the core system does not exist " Wii + x360 is $50 more than a PS3.. but having ample experience with all three systems, I can say that extra $50 is well worth it for two great systems compared to a ps3.

Actually, I suspect he meant the Premium since he said "Costs less than a PS3 and a game". Which is actually a more fair comparison as the Wii comes with a game already.

In US Dollars a Wii = $250 + a $400 premium is less than a $600 (only price available) PS3 + a $60 game.

This also discounts the fact that you can typically find a 360 premium with either a second (wireless) controller or a free game, depending on the week / store you go to.

So...

[brkello]

It is about every 2 days when we get someone from Sony talking about price cuts then someone else at Sony saying that there won't be price cuts. Now come all the posts on how it is stupid for a company to announce a price drop until they are ready to actually drop the price. blah blah blah...news worthy? blah blah blah. It's Friday morning...I need something better than this to get me through the rest of the day.

Re:So...

[EggyToast]

Well the caveat that they shouldn't announce until they're ready to drop the prices implies that people would actually buy the console at the current price :)

Captain' Obvious

[alph0ns3]

'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper'

Wow, this guy needs to win the "Captain Obvious" award of the year!

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Daniel_Staal]

Actually, it's not obvious. The XBox 360 for instance is also cheaper, and not getting as much buzz at the moment. (Perhaps just because it isn't 'new' at the moment, but also because it isn't as 'different' as the Wii is.)

Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper? I sincerly doubt it. I think Sony and Nintendo intentionally aimed for different target audiences, and Sony found out that the audience they targeted at didn't exist in the numbers they thought existed. Now they will have to scramble to market a product to an audience it is not designed for. Meanwhile, Nintendo judged their market quite well.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Applekid]

Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

Then again, considering the audience of the article, cost cost cost price price price seem to be the major motivations.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Daniel_Staal]

Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

Yeah, I noticed that as well. I suspect the speaker knew what he was talking about, and that 'cost' is just the variable Sony is most able to change at this point. (And that he tailored his speach for his audience...)

Re:Captain' Obvious

[CastrTroy]

While the target audiences are different, the target audiences overlapped. Nintendo chose to build a console that almost everyone would like in some way. Sony chose to build a console that only a small portion of people would like. Sony limited their market by making it cost so much, that even a lot of people who would probably want one, aren't buying one. Same thing happened to NeoGeo. Everybody that I knew who saw the thing said they wanted one, but I don't know anybody who actually bought one. I would like to own a PS3, but it is way out of my price range. So by having a smaller number of people who actually want the product, and by making it really expensive, they have really cut down on sales. Decreasing the price will bring up sales, but it won't capture as many sales as the Wii, because their target market is "everybody".

Re:Captain' Obvious

[rising_hope]

I disagree completely that Nintendo did a better job at judging their market. Nintendo intended to be the niche player of the video game market, looking for a fun product that will sell to people looking for an original experience -- just enough to keep them in the game. They were completely unprepared for the reaction of the public -- the completely positive reaction of the market. As it turns out, the market was begging for something new and original, and the Wii turned out to be a huge hit no one saw coming. Long before the Wii came out, billions of fanboys were all "Sony this" and "360 that," but when they hit the shelves and actually looked at the market, everyone lined up to score a Wii. In a sense, Sony should have judged better from prior experience, looking at the failed 3DO that the real niche market is the high end. Personally, I think the 360 is fairly priced and more exactly where this generation of consoles should be in terms of power -- but the originality of Nintendo prooved that sometimes you have to hit a moving, invisible target in order to win the game.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Kortalh]

Of course, the question now is whether the rest of the industry will take the hint that people prefer innovative and experimental gameplay over Highseller 8: The Rehashing. So far, they seem to be completely oblivious. Big companies like EA and Atari -- the ones that can afford to be innovative -- are still unwilling to try anything really different (Will Wright excepted), though time and time again, consumers have proven to prefer the unique titles and gameplay. The Wii seems to be falling into the same trap, too. They innovated with a unique and interesting gameplay mechanism -- the Wiimote -- but they seem to be only pumping out mini-game collections, which apparently sell fairly well, rather than taking the Wii to its limit and showing us just how revolutionary it really can be. As a Wii owner, I really want to love it. But now that I've tired of Wii Sports, and have no interest in the other mini-game titles (Mario Party 8, WarioWare, Big Brain Academy, ect),it's become nothing more than elaborate web browser.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[stratjakt]

AH NEO GEO now you're talking.

Actually, Neo Geo was originally designed as a rental machine, the idea was you'd go to EB and rent one for your birthday party, so you could play real arcade games at home. Hence, the high prices. They put the cartridges on a different physical format so arcade operators couldnt use them, otherwise the hardware and games are identical.

Anyways, once they started showing up, people wanted to buy them - so EB started selling them. The prices never dropped, once again, they were being sold to EB for the purposes of rental. Eventually SNK realized what was going on, and tried to market to the rest of the home crowd with the Neo Geo CD. The load times killed the "true arcade" feel, and the appeal really was to arcade gamers, since there were only weak attempts at making home console titles for it.

So, you can't compare PS3 - if you look at it in perspective, the Neo Geo AES was a completely unexpected success.

The story of SNKs decline and demise is long and sordid, but sadly had little to do with tech or their products. You can read about the Barones on the googleweb.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[CastrTroy]

I didn't know the Neo Geo was supposed to be a rental unit. Anyway, the only place I ever say it was at my local rental shop. My local video game rental shop had set up their own arcade. They had a bunch of SNES/Genesis/Neo Geo machines set up, and you payed by the hour to play the games. I think you could buy time in 15 minute or half hour slots. I'm sure they made a killing this way. First, you could try out the consoles and games before you bought them, and it got people into the store to rent games. There would also be a lot of people just standing around and watching, just like in the real arcade, but most of them ended up renting games, so it was good for business. Plus pay by the hour was a much better model for arcade games, since it didn't matter if you sucked, you didn't have to spend extra money. Eventually they closed down. However, I wish I could still find places like this.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[fimbulvetr]

I disagree completely that Nintendo did a better job at judging their market.

I see. Was it that Nintendo is making money hand over fist or the fact that Sony is desperately trying to sell these units that led you to the conclusion that Nintendo didn't do a better job at judging their market?

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Khisanth Magus]

The only thing that leads me to believe nintendo may of misjudged their market is that they were completely unprepared for the demand and simply didn't have the production capabilities to keep up with it.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, my response is, you get what you pay for. At the risk of starting a flame war, I gotta say that you have to expect nothing more than mini-game titles when you bought the system.

See the problem with the Wii is that it IS all mini-game titles. Nintendo seems to be focusing on capturing the "casual gamer" market on console, but that requires that they move away from complex games. To get that $150 price, they sacrifice the sort of graphical niceness and AI capability that video games are evolving into.

Even the Wiimote is not that revolutionary. By that I don't mean it isn't cool or new, but that it won't advance the state of the art of gaming. All the Wiimote does is make video games more accessible to new gamers, it does not really offer more interesting ways to play for people who already know how to use a controller. The true advancements come with things like more space and processing power. It sounds fanboyish and elitist, but it's true. In order to have, for example, completely open-ended worlds and multiply branching storylines you need the hardware to handle that sort of thing. You need the blu-ray disc to store all that code and memory. You need multiple processors to tell the NPCs to react in a life-like, intelligent manner.

Frankly, "unique" and "interesting" gameplay comes, blooms briefly, then goes. But the games that stay, the ones we play for years, even decades, are games like Starcraft and Counterstrike. Both of which are games that came years after their genre began, and can be termed as about as innovative as a horse-drawn wagon.

The Wii is essentially the Yahoo! games of console play. It's fun for grandma and it's doesn't need an expensive gaming system, but if gaming is truly part of your life, in the sense of checking the latest offerings and keeping up to date on gaming news, it will only disappoint.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[WedgeTalon]

They're making a comeback. They're usually called "LAN Centers" or "Gaming Centers" or perhaps throw in a "Cafe" somewhere.

http://www.igames.org/FindCenter.asp

Re:Captain' Obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

>>Sony found out that the audience they targeted at didn't exist in the numbers they thought existed.

or maybe the target audience is still working those extra hours to afford one like sony says to.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[fimbulvetr]

Fair enough. I'll give you that. It's arguably understandable, to some degree, why this happened. They did take one heck of a risk and hedged on the fact that they wouldn't sell many (initially, at least).

The thing is, if the plan didn't succeed, they would have been able to cut their losses early and possibly scramble to compensate for it. If their plan did succeed (Like it ostensibly has), the worst case would be that they would have to ramp up production and lose some potential business from casual buyers. In the long run, they'll still get a non-trivial portion of these buyers by popularity, word of mouth and genuine fun factor alone.

Now we just have to see if they can follow through with some exceptional games that can take the system to the next level.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[KDR_11k]

EA is actually trying new gameplay ideas, as unbelievable as it sounds. From what I heard the port of the Godfather game to the Wii made good use of the Wiimote, same for Madden Wii. I know many regular and hardcore gamers ignore EA because of the large number of rehashes but strangely EA seems to have adapted seamlessly to the different requirements of the Wii platform. I guess they can innovate if they want, they just didn't want to until now.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[KDR_11k]

I disagree, having an easy pointing device in the control system is useful for many games. Hell, even action games with autoaim could use the pointer for target selection. The Wiimote is both a pointing device and a gesture input which means it gives you more ways to communicate things to the game in a precise way. PC gamers had that with the mouse but on the console a mouse isn't really useful because you usually don't have a desk to place it on. With the Wii games can require much more precision from the player since the input device is precise enough. Additional processing power improves some parts, precise control others.

Re:Captain' Obvious

[rising_hope]

It was the fact that Nintendo hit the market with far fewer units than the demand required, and that production capacity didn't manage to even catch up for nearly 6 months after the unit shipped. Additionally, Nintendo themselves admitted they were overwhelmed at the success of the Wii. Just because your item is the hot ticket in town doesn't mean you planned it that way.

I wasn't bashing Nintendo at all -- I was merely pointing out the fact that no one had even thought Nintendo would be much in the running with the Wii, let alone the champs in the market for the current generation console, including Nintendo themselves. The product introduction of the Revolution (renamed Wii) was very niche marketed and the presenter from Nintendo of America looked positively nervous about the product introduction. The Wii was a gamble -- one that paid off. But I think the pay off even caught Nintendo by surprise.

Games

[strider2k]

I don't really care about the price. I'd be glad to pay the $600 US dollars for the premium. The sad part is, what games will I get? The answer is none. I don't have a big HD tv. So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy. I guess I'll play my ds/gba (lots of good games) or board games (Settlers or Puerto Rico)!!!

When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.

Re:Games

[EveryNickIsTaken]

So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy. I think the major point is that they need to release AAA exclusives. If they lose exclusivity on either (or both) MGS/FF, then there is little reason, if any, for people to buy a PS3 over a 360. Given Sony's woes as of late, how long will the company allow their playstation division to hemorrhage money? It's not like they've got a blank check like the MS gaming division.

Re:Games

[drinkypoo]

So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy.

the sad thing is that they said that the console would heat up for christmas, but the great games wouldn't come out until after that. So Sony has what, one maybe two A-list titles until after christmas?

That's a long time.

When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.

I don't know, will it be? Will they still be in the running by then? I'm kind of thinking that there's some good games on the Xbox 360 right now, that pretty much everyone in the market has a PS2 so back-compatibility is a total non-issue, and that people will be buying Wiis (they are becoming more available even now) and Xbox 360s while they're waiting for Sony to get their shit together and get out some games.

But, maybe that's just wishful thinking.

Re:Games

[Lightwarrior]

It's worse than the PS3 needing just AAA exclusives - there's a general dearth of quality games available. Check out Game Rankings / Metacritic / GameStats / the rating grouper of your choice; the only game above 90% is Oblivion. There are four exclusives in the Top 20: Resistance, Motorstorm, Virtual Fighter 5, and flOw.

And once you get out of the Top 20, the ratings has already dropped below 80%. That's a serious, serious issue.

Re:Games

[DrXym]

The release schedule is cranking up significantly. Major games like The Darkness, Rainbow 6: Vegas, Ninja Gaiden Sigma are imminent, with Stranglehold, Lair, Warhawk, Singstar, Heavenly Sword, Assassins Creed appearing in the next 2 or 3 months. In total there are something like 70 or so titles appearing before the end of year many of which are exclusives.

I think if Sony knocked off $100 or $125 that combined with the busier release schedule they'd probably quadruple their sales.

Re:Games

[amuro98]

The PS3 needs exclusive games that are "good" or better. Darkness isn't exclusive, nor is Assassins Creed.

I don't know why people keep mentioning Singstar. Do you honestly think a karaoke/DDR game is going to convince anyone to buy a PS3? Even fans of those games aren't going to spend $600 (or even $500) just to get a single game.

Warhawk is very confusing, as it was first a Blu-ray game, then was a online only deathmatch type game that you would download, for free even. Now it's supposedly both a BR AND download game?

Furthermore, even if Sony did manage to lower the price this year (unlikely) and quadruple its sales, according to the latest data, that would put the PS3's sales at about 350k in the US. This is lot better, and may even beat monthly 360 sales for once. Unfortunately, the 360 still has its 12 months head start, plus months of outselling the PS3. Also, any move that Sony makes will simply be matched by Microsoft who unlike Sony, is actually making a small profit off their hardware at the current time. On top of all this, the Wii is expected to continue its strong sales into 2008, meaning it will still be ahead of the PS3, and ever gaining on the 360.

Finally, consider this, the 360 has Halo3 coming this fall, and that alone is expected to be a major incentive to buyers. The PS3 has nothing nearly as compelling on its schedule at this time. Yes, I know Lair! Heavenly Sword! But remember - those games aren't out yet. Many folks feel they got burned by the PS3's launch lineup which only managed to turn out 1 OK/good exclusive game. Even Genji, which was expected to be a major inticement for gamers, turned out to be fairly mediocre and worse still, buggy. I sincerely hope that Lair, Heavenly Sword and others live up to their hype, but past experience tells me that this is rarely the case. I'm sure they'll be good games, but not the WOW-GREAT! titles that the PS3 needs right now.

Re:Games

[DrEldarion]

Man, if you think that's bad, look at the Wii's rankings on GameRankings.

Re:Games

[DrXym]

The PS3 needs exclusive games that are "good" or better. Darkness isn't exclusive, nor is Assassins Creed.

Not really. It needs a constant stream of titles, including hits, including downloadable content. I mentioned those games because they're coming out soon. The second half of this year is very full. Sony has plenty of exclusives lined up too for that period..

I don't know why people keep mentioning Singstar. Do you honestly think a karaoke/DDR game is going to convince anyone to buy a PS3? Even fans of those games aren't going to spend $600 (or even $500) just to get a single game.

They keep mentioning it because Singstar sells by the shitload. Perhaps not in the US, but the EU has dozens of versions of Singstar. It's very popular. Even the US might catch on once it goes online.

Warhawk is very confusing, as it was first a Blu-ray game, then was a online only deathmatch type game that you would download, for free even. Now it's supposedly both a BR AND download game?

I don't understand your confusion. Download or buy retail. Pick your model. Retail has a bluetooth headset included, download is probably cheaper and more immediate. Same game, same content. I believe XBL games are also available through bricks and mortar - same deal here. Warhawk is also garnering extremey favourable comments from people on Neogaf who are involved in the beta phase.

Furthermore, even if Sony did manage to lower the price this year (unlikely) and quadruple its sales, according to the latest data, that would put the PS3's sales at about 350k in the US.

That's my guess but I don't consider it unreasonable. I don't know why you think it unlikely that there will be a price drop. It's almost a sure thing considering noises made by Sony and everyone else recently.

This is lot better, and may even beat monthly 360 sales for once. Unfortunately, the 360 still has its 12 months head start, plus months of outselling the PS3. Also, any move that Sony makes will simply be matched by Microsoft who unlike Sony, is actually making a small profit off their hardware at the current time. On top of all this, the Wii is expected to continue its strong sales into 2008, meaning it will still be ahead of the PS3, and ever gaining on the 360.

The Wii does have strong sales, but the fact is that its no more powerful than an Xbox. It's last gen and nothing will change that. It doesn't have the legs to carry it more than a few years.

Finally, consider this, the 360 has Halo3 coming this fall, and that alone is expected to be a major incentive to buyers. The PS3 has nothing nearly as compelling on its schedule at this time. Yes, I know Lair! Heavenly Sword! But remember - those games aren't out yet. Many folks feel they got burned by the PS3's launch lineup which only managed to turn out 1 OK/good exclusive game. Even Genji, which was expected to be a major inticement for gamers, turned out to be fairly mediocre and worse still, buggy. I sincerely hope that Lair, Heavenly Sword and others live up to their hype, but past experience tells me that this is rarely the case. I'm sure they'll be good games, but not the WOW-GREAT! titles that the PS3 needs right now.

Halo 1 & 2 were great games and Halo 3 will probably be too. But it's not the only FPS in town. Arguably Halo has had its day even on the XBox when you have the likes of Gears, UT2007, HL2, R6: Vegas and doubtless others all this year alone. I also know that the PS3 has a very strong lineup of titles including 20 or so 1st / 2nd party titles and many of them are hotly anticipated titles.

Re:Games

[Jurrasic]

The Wii does have strong sales, but the fact is that its no more powerful than an Xbox. It's last gen and nothing will change that. It doesn't have the legs to carry it more than a few years

I don't give a wet hamster fart if the Wii was LITERALLY two Gamecubes duct-taped together like the wannabe web-comedians claim. The fact that I can choke a wiseguy out in The Godfather by making throttling motions with my hands or perform acts of miracle surgery in an intuitive and fun manner in Trauma Center is what makes the Wii win out over the more powerful but less flexible MS and Sony boxen. The market has spoken. Just as important, the PUBLISHERS have spoken. Sneering that it's 'last gen' dosen't convince anyone that this untrue fact is relevant but you, yourself and thou. (That or you've been burned in the lineup for a wii at Best Buy too many times and are just sour-grapes'ing it.)

Re:Games

[Pluvius]

I don't give a wet hamster fart if the Wii was LITERALLY two Gamecubes duct-taped together like the wannabe web-comedians claim.

You will in a couple of years.

Rob

Re:Games

[DrXym]

Even though The Godfather is a bad game on all platforms and Trauma Center is better on the DS?

Seriously, every Wii game thinks it has to reinvent the control scheme even when it is gratuitous and tacked on. Gestures may work for simple actions that have a 1:1 mapping to real life. Gestures suck rocks for anything for anything more complex.

And yes the Wii is last gen. Having a gimmicky controller does not change that fact.

Re:Games

[amuro98]

Singstar - even if it is popular in Europe, is it worth $700 ($600+$60+tax) in the US? How about $900 in Europe?

Warhawk - it's confusing because the format of the game has changed a lot. First it was a single player and multiplayer game, then it was multiplayer only. First it was BR only, then download only (and FREE) now it's both?? And no, XBLA games are not for sale in stores. You must buy them online with your 360.

Wii - just because it doesn't have the HD graphics of the 360 or PS3 doesn't make it a 'weaker' machine. The DS also has weaker graphics compared to the PSP. The DS is also outselling the PSP by a huge number. In fact, the DS is outselling every other game platform - including the so-called 'next gen' PS3 and 360. Not everyone cares about graphics as much as they do about gameplay. The DS and Wii are just the latest examples of this.

Halo3 - I didn't mention this game because it's a FPS. I mentioned it because people want this game, and will buy a 360 just to play it - if they haven't already purchased a 360.

It's like MGS2 was for the PS2. There was so much excitement around this title from the moment that demo movie was played at E3 all those years ago. This title sold untold 1000s of PS2s even though the game didn't hit the shelves over a year later.

The PS3 needs something like Halo3 or MGS2 or GT2 - something that is a going to be a surefire hit that everyone gets excited enough about to actually buy a console.

Right now, the PS3 has some good games coming for it, but nothing that seems to be EXCELLENT. Buying a $600 console for just a handful of ok or even good games just isn't going to happen. For $600, people are going to have much higher expectations, and so far, the PS3 hasn't delivered. This is also in part due to Sony's feverish assurances that the PS3 would be some sort of god-like piece of electronics...but so far hasn't outperformed its "older" and cheaper competitor.

Yes, the PS3 has other big titles lined up...but many of them aren't due until NEXT YEAR. In the meantime, neither the 360 nor the Wii are going to just stop and wait.

Re:Games

[Jurrasic]

Even though The Godfather is a bad game on all platforms and Trauma Center is better on the DS?

??Have you played either game on the Wii or are you just guessing here? Trauma Center is almost a different game on the Wii with the addition of a number of new operations (thankfully ones that are more like RL, rather then chasing down bio-engineered bugs) re-worked operations like the bomb defusing one and the wii-mote + Nunchuck combo completely re-invents the interface from one of torture to one of FEELING like a surgeon, as much as a videogame can do that. Seriously, even if you have played the DS version, try the Wii one before you sound off on /. Godfather is not a great game I grant you, but it's 10x more fun on the Wii then on any other platform by virtue of, you guessed it, the control interface. Again, try it first. Don't extrapolate. It's not even close to the ps2 kludge-fest.

Re:Games

[donaldm]

Well you can do like I did and look arround for a good bargin on the PS3 since I got mine for AU$499 (approx US$410) with a working PS2 plus 10 PS2 games. Granted there are not many PS3 games I am intersted in but then again there are not many games I am interested in for the Wii or the Xbox360 either.

It may come as a shock to many but there are plenty of used and new games for the PS2 and since firmware update 1.8 most PS1/2 games work (Australian PS3 uses emulation unlike the US/Japan one that uses hardware). In fact if you have a HDTV the PS3 will upscale your PS1 and PS2 games to 720p, 1080i or even 1080p and the result can be impressive.

If you are interested in a PS3 or even Xbox360 you should also consider a HDTV at 32" minimum or more (depends how much you can afford) may stores will reduce the PS3 price on package deals. Of course the Wii will work on a HDTV as well but it won't look as good. Still good graphics don't make up for a bad game.

This is posted from my PS3 using a wireless keyboad.

Re:Games

[buffer-overflowed]

Unfair comparison. Reviewers are far harsher on the Wii and DS then they are on the PS3/PSP/360.

Probably because outside graphics and sound, they can't *actually* critique something, because the gaming media sucks.

Re:Games

[buffer-overflowed]

That's your list? That's hilarious.

The Darkness - Cross platform, and not all that interesting.
R6: Vegas - Cross-platform.
Ninja Gaiden Sigma - No one cares, seriously, no one cares.
Stranglehold - See Ninja Gaiden Sigma.
Lair - Preferred this when it was called Rogue Squadron and had the Star Wars License.
Warhawk - WTF is this now? An FPS, a shooter, an action game? Free download, pay download, retail box game?
Singstar - Europe and 3 people outside Europe care.
Heavenly Sword - Ok... It's like God of War, right, but with a girl, and it may or may not be better than Genji!
Assassin's Creed - Cross-platform.

What a *great* list you have there. That definitely is competitive with Mario, Metroid, Smash, and Halo. Oh wait, no, it isn't.

Re:Games

[prockcore]

Well, two of those "imminent" games are going to be on the 360 as well. The PS3 has to do BETTER than the 360... it can't just be "as good".

Re:Games

[DrEldarion]

... or maybe it's because novel control schemes aren't always better for all games, though they get shoehorned into every genre that you can think of?

Re:Games

[LKM]

Taking out ports and remakes, we have Lair, Warhawk and Heavenly Sword, two of which are at least somewhat questionable. Warhawk had major issues during development, Lair seems to have issues with control. I have high hopes for all of these games, but even if they deliver, I doubt these are the kinds of games that sell consoles. The PS3 needs an exclusive GTA, it needs a new MGS, and it needs FF. Then it will be able to compete with the 360.

The Wii is another story altogether. For the Wii, the PS3 needs exclusive Singstar, Guitar Hero and Buzz titles. And it needs a lot more, a lot faster.

I own a PS3 as well as a Wii. They are both great consoles. But I doubt the PS3 will ever be able to compete with the Wii. With the 360? Probably. Wii? Nah.

Re:Games

[LKM]

The Wii does have strong sales, but the fact is that its no more powerful than an Xbox. It's last gen and nothing will change that. It doesn't have the legs to carry it more than a few years.

A lot of the points you make are good, but this one isn't. It's ignorant and moronic. First, the definition of "current gen" is that it came out during this generation. The Wii came out during this generation. That makes it current-gen.

Second, even if you go with the "metaphysical" definition of "current-gen," you'd come up with something like "significantly different from last gen." Now tell me, what games are the most different from last gen? Ninja Gaiden Sigma is basically a hi-res Xbox game. Most 360/PS3 games are hi-res versions of last-gen games. The Wii is the only console actually offering anything fresh. By that definition, you could almost argue that the Wii is the only current-gen console.

Lastly, the Leader always comes out with a new console last. Nintendo will do the same. The Wii might very well end up the console with the longest life-span of the current generation. If the PS3 doesn't deliver, Sony needs to cut its losses sooner or later and abandon it.

Re:Games

[LKM]

You will in a couple of years.

No. I won't.

Re:Games

[LKM]

Even though The Godfather is a bad game on all platforms

That's the thing. The only version that is good is the Wii version. Have you even played the game? No, wait, you obviously haven't, otherwise you'd know that the "gestures" in Godfather map to real life perfectly well.

Also, "gimmicky controller"? Geez, you'd think by now all those Wii haters would have found a new meme.

Re:Games

[buffer-overflowed]

No, it's more because most reviewers are gaming-store reject neckbeards and have a poor attitude towards change. Thanks for playing though. I can't name a Wii game I own where the controls have truly detracted from the experience, and many where they have vastly improved it.

But hey, "ZELDA DOESN'T HAVE ORCHESTRATED MUSIC AND VOICE ACTING, -2 FROM THE SCORE!"
"THIS PSP GAME IS A SHITTY VERSION OF A PS2 GAME, BUT IT LOOKS GOOD, 8/10!"

When will they learn...

[svendsen]

Yes the price is high but I am not sure it's the price stopping a lot of people. When someone is going to buy a system now they aren't thinking I will buy this machine now and hope the game I want comes out, they are thinking I am buying this because they are games out now I want to get.

Sony needs games and fast. Good games that are exclusive. That will solve their biggest problem. If the ps3 dropped to 300 bucks would anyone outside the I want blue-ray/linux running on it/etc. crowd buy one? I'm not sure they would until they are games they want.

But what do I know, I thought the Mini Disc was going to rule the world.

Re:When will they learn...

[joerdie]

Although I dont own a PS3, (mostly because I havent spent the time to budget for one) I thought the PS3 was going to do well even with the price point... until I saw the current crop of games. As a side point, I too thought mini-disc was going to rise up and kill the CD. My wife still wont let that go.

Re:When will they learn...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the Mini Disc was going to rule the world.

It could have and should have. The creator of the walkman, back when their brand reputation was rather better, in a huge market with a fundamentally good product and no real competitors ... portable mp3 devices weren't practical / affordable till years later. Leave it to Sony to manage to fuck this up with excessive costs, stupid unnecessary DRM restrictions and some of the worst audio transfer software ever devised (SonicStage.)

Re:When will they learn...

[Floritard]

I'll tell you right now, the price is stopping me. And that is all that is stopping me. I had a Wii for a few months. I bought it on an impulse (right place right time), partly because I was intrigued by the new control scheme, but mostly because it's waaay cheaper than the other "next-gen" systems. I have since given it away to a friend of mine because I promised to buy her one at some point, but also because there are no games out for it that I really want (yet). While I did get bored of it already, the lack of games wasn't something that stopped me from buying it in the first place. And the Wii is so cheap that I'll easily pick one up again when they become more available. Not so with that wallet monster PS3. I can build most of a new PC off newegg for the price of that little bastard. Games or no games, it gives me pause dropping $600+ on a fucking console, they're supposed to be the cheap alternative to PC gaming. As it stands now I really don't know what to do, there are games coming out that I am looking forward to but luckily they aren't here yet. I'm on the fence here, I'll definitely get another Wii, but I will also want either a 360 or a PS3 for those truly next-gen games. Despite Sony's incompetance of late, I really dislike Microsoft's history of foul play and would prefer to stop buying into their products, especially after this power-grab Vista/DX10 business. I'm not especially excited about giving Microsoft so much control over the gaming world. But that PS3 is so damn expensive that I'm worried if I buy it I'll be stuck with a failed system. An expensive failed system. This whole gen is off to a bad start if you ask me. Too much risk. I'm waiting, and the industry isn't getting my gaming dollar.

Re:When will they learn...

[svendsen]

I can respect that. Question though: if the price was still $600 BUT they where say 10 triple AAA games you really wanted would that effect your decision at all?

As for the not wanting to support MS because you don't like them obviously that's a valid point for you. For me I bought one when there was at least a few games I really wanted (oblivion was my first) and that was back in Aug. 06.

Re:When will they learn...

[Eponymous Crowbar]

Sony, M$ and Nintendo have all done "evil" things in the games/entertainment biz. Sure, you can pick out certain bad deeds and say they are the worst. For me, I am still boycotting Sony because if their rootkit and entertainment mafia connections, combined with a personal history of being burned by poor quality Sony home electronics that underperform early and die too soon. But I digress -- for most people, it is probably best to buy the consoles that work the best for your life today and not worry too much about the supposedly AAA titles that may be around the corner. That's why my wife and kids play the Wii and I log about 20-30 hours per week on my 360.

Re:When will they learn...

[CastrTroy]

Just curious. What things has Nintendo done that you consider "evil"?

Re:When will they learn...

[xero314]

That's why my wife and kids play the Wii and I log about 20-30 hours per week on my 360. Sorry I just thought that needed Highlighting. Ever think your wife and kids play the Wii because you log 20-30 hours per week on your 360? It's either that or you really need to get a job.

Re:When will they learn...

[Eponymous Crowbar]

I vaguely recall that Nintendo screwed over some 3rd party developers, and I am not happy with some of the ways they tightly and smugly manage their image (although they are well within their rights there). I guess it is the latter that gets to me. Let's face it, they don't compare to MS or Sony on evil deeds, but I think there's enough there to fuel a bit of mistrust. Hey, I still have a Wii and a Cube, so it's not like I hate them!

Re:When will they learn...

[amuro98]

Even if there were 10 AAA games that's a total price of $1200. Ok, fine, so who buys 10 new games at once anyways? So you buy a PS3 and 3 games. That's still about $800.

No, the console must come down in price.

Re:When will they learn...

[mrchaotica]

Nothing recently, but Nintendo was absolutely notorious back in the NES/SNES days for censorship (e.g. Mortal Kombat), price-fixing, etc.

Re:When will they learn...

[Eponymous Crowbar]

Allow me to elaborate -- the wife plays Zelda and the kids play party games while we all sit around together. You could say that we all play the Wii, but really the parents just encourage the kids and the kids do all the playing. I actually do have a job, but I work a rotating shift that leaves me wide awake at home while everyone else is either at school/work or dead asleep, so I play shooters online. I agree that if I simply came home from work and started playing games by myself then your point might have been completely valid. I'm just not on the same schedule as everyone else more than 5 days out of the month. I mentioned the 20-30 hours simply to point out that I could have been playing the Wii at that time but I chose the 360 instead. I also could have used that time to learn a foreign language, study romantic literature or enhance my professional skills.... but that doesn't happen as often.

Re:When will they learn...

[Floritard]

Yea yea, the rootkits. Big deal though really. It was shitty and they got caught red handed. There's no way you can use a rootkit and not get found out anyway. That's DRM, that's obvious. Nerds find it and report it within hours. See Sony's misdeeds are those of an outsider, someone who has little control over the big picture really. They make electronics. They sell gadgets. They've tried to gain control of formats (Betamax, now Blu-ray) but have so far failed to really matter in a way that a juggernaut like MS does. Microsoft basically owns the entire OS market as well as a large portion of all the mainstream business software that everyone uses. Embrace, extend, extinguish. Maybe you have a Sony laptop, but almost definitely you're running Windows. Microsoft has an effect on the lives of everyone in this country, whether they're into gadgets or not. Warships run on their software. Governments count beans with it. There's alot of reach that those other Japanese companies just can't touch. Sony, Nintendo, they've done some things that I don't like, most big companies do. I'm sure there are lots of people on these forums that can go on and on in both directions about the notorious hatred of Microsoft on this site, but myself I simply don't want to deal with them anymore. I think they've proven to be predatory and anti-consumer, but what's worse really, is that they have a track record of pushing mediocrity and riding on market dominance. No thank you. I especially don't want them reaching into the one area of my life I use to escape the shitty realities of the power-hungry and the greedy who make the rest of the world such a bummer. Games. I still see Sony and Nintendo as the lesser evils by wide margins. I mean really, it just depresses me to think I might have to go to Microsoft for all my games. The Windows logo is spirit crushing enough anymore.

It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[Joe The Dragon]

as they cost more then ps3 and they are missing a few blue ray features and it plays games as well as running linux.

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[SparkyFlooner]

600 bucks for a Blu Ray player is still way too high.

Especially since movies cost 30 bucks.

And you can only watch a subset of movies that are released today because some are only available in HD-DVD and some are only available in Blu Ray.

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[drinkypoo]

as they cost more then ps3

No, no they don't.

and they are missing a few blue ray features

What do you know about it? You can't even spell blu-ray.

Regardless, what is the sony BDP player missing but ethernet? Will you not be able to do PIP? Oh noes!!!11!!11ones!

and it plays games as well as running linux.

What games? There's like two worth buying.

And as for Linux, it's running in a Hypervisor intended to keep you from fully utilizing the hardware. The point of running Linux is that it is open, not just that it's Unix. For less money I can get a far more useful system. The system has only 256MB of system memory (that's all you can use for Linux) so it's horribly anemic as a computer. Xbox's shared memory makes it much more desirable as a Linux box and Free/free Linux is making headway there.

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[Vexor]

I still wouldn't bet on blu-ray alone. That format war isn't over yet. HD is still in the fight. As for me I'm perfectly content with a DVD for $20 or less.

While I agree there isn't a "overwhelming" selection of games for any next-gen console I think the 360 definitly has the edge in until some heavy hitters from Nintendo and Sony show up. Even still though the PS3 lost GTAIV (and FFXIII as I've heard it?) as exclusive which is going to cost them dearly.

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[seebs]

You're sort of begging the question, there. You're assuming that a blu-ray player is worth buying at "full price", and looking at this as a discount.

If I open a store called "McDucks" that sells bad hamburgers for $500, and then McDonalds starts selling them for $90, does the fact that they're more than 80% cheaper make them a good deal? No.

Blu-ray isn't worth the money, so getting it for only way too much instead of WTF are you thinking too much is not a big deal.

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[Xjuan]

no need to lower the price, just bundle it with MGS4 or a FF or both this Christmas and you are done! Speaking seriously, its nice to be able to install other OS like linux but other than to show it to your friends you can whats whats the deal? I want more RAM! Why dont they release a deluxe version with more RAM, 1GB or 2GB will do, they could charge way more than the extra RAM cost and it would be very usable as a PC. Games will still use 256, and the rest could be used as cache! :P Anyway this do not make any sense if they do not allow 3d acceleration, hey man! at least give us half the shaders!

Re:It's still a good buy as just a blue ray player

[DeeDob]

But for HD movies, HD-DVD players are way cheaper than a PS3 (which is in turn cheaper than a BluRay player, like you said).

Why buy a PS3 for BluRay if i can have HD-DVD for less?

It's not as if any of those two formats has already become a, and i use the term loosely, "winner".

The, again i use the next term loosely, "smart" people buy their HD movies in digital, downloadable format through various online marketplaces. That way, no matter if a format fails or is discontinued, they will still be able to watch their movies 100 years from now.

For those like me that are going on the 3rd option, the downloadable option, the PS3 as a BluRay player fails completely.
Currently, the PS3 also fails as a gaming machine. Aside from what? 2 or 3 "noteworthy" games, all can be found on other platforms, most of the time with critics saying it's slightly better on the "other" platforms...

So if it fails as an "HD" movies player AND it "currently" fails as a gaming platform AND is the most expansive console out there, is it a wonder why it's not going as strong as the Wii (or the 360)?

1) Bring games quick, before 2008 (tons of games).
2) Bring an HD movies online marketplace (movies that can be used on other things than just the PS3 as there's no point in having a movie in digital format you can only play in one place).
3) Lower the cost.

They Have no footing

[ShrapnelFace]

Their problem is that they dont know what to do- this is such a hot and competitive market right now, how do you justify a proce drop without contemplating that your competitor will do the same? I think they feel the market response with these comments and measure both responses (consumer and competitor) to determine what the timing is right now.

This just in...

[pragma_x]

""'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' "

In a recent shake-up within the Japan-based electronics juggernaut Sony, Captain Obvious was promoted to the position of CEO.

Re:This just in...

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the E in CEO?

Re:This just in...

[Anonymous Coward]

His full name is Captain Edward Obvious.

In other news, PS3 to lose more money than before

[Lord of Hyphens]

So they're going to sell it at more of a loss than originally? Especially with games for the thing being expensive to make?

"..and then you will begin to see break-out games"

[tonywestonuk]

erm, I could buy a C64 from ebay, and play "break-out" games...

Re:In other news, PS3 to lose more money than befo

[tb()ne]

So they're going to sell it at more of a loss than originally? Especially with games for the thing being expensive to make?

Not necessarily. Production costs are apparently coming down so they will only take more of a loss if the price cut is greater than the reduction in production costs.

Very good business model....

[MrAngryForNoReason]

Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours...

Oh yes the revolutionary business model of selling a product for a reasonable price while still making a profit. Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.

Re:Very good business model....

[nomadic]

Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.

Worked well for the PS2, didn't it?

Re:Very good business model....

[zoomzit]

I think Sony's big problem is that even if they cut prices by $100 on their consoles (which translates into an additional $100 lost on every console) it probably still won't move enough units to substantially increase sales of games or increase uptake on Blu-ray (which is what they are really after).

The PS3 just isn't an compelling enough product for consumers even if Sony is taking a bath on each product sold. I think Sony's solution should be to segment their market. Sony should keep trying to sell the PS3 as as game console/Blu-ray player on one hand, but also take the innards of the PS3, put it in a different box, load up a copy of linux and sell it with a keyboard and mouse at whatever it cost them to build the thing and a create a unique low budget computer. This might be totally against the Sony culture and they might not sell a ton, but at the very least, they could keep the assembly line moving and not lose quite so much money as they are now.

Re:Very good business model....

[tb()ne]

Oh yes the revolutionary business model of selling a product for a reasonable price while still making a profit. Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.

The business model is not without precedent.

sed s/Sony/Microsoft/ $PARENT_POST

Re:Very good business model....

[Glytch]

A HD capable xbox360 with the same ammount of Harddrivespace costs just as much as the PS3 (even the PS3 is a but cheaper, since it does also have Wifi built in), so in the end the PS3 isn't that pricey at all...

If ones wants to get into the whole next-gen movie disc format before there's a clear winner and risk spending $600 plus disc costs on the 21st century's very own Beta format, and if one has a high-def capable TV.

I will not sink one single penny into any high-def disc format until movie studios drop support entirely for one of the formats, and considering Sony's luck in the past on such things, I'm not betting on Blu-Ray. I'm also not getting a high-def TV until there's a disc format winner. By the time the dust settles, prices will be considerably lower.

Re:Very good business model....

[desenz]

Was that an intentional troll, or do you just enjoy attacking people for their opinions?

Re:Very good business model....

[RamblinLonghorn]

"Well, it isn't difficult to sell an old useless console with profit, because that's what the wii is, old technology, the control is not even that great or special, for god sake, you can't even play a dvd on the bugger even though it has a dvdplayer inside..."

It's the same reason a Honda Accord outsells a Porsche 911. It's good, proven technology, that, while not the most powerful or cutting edge, fits the budget of the largest segment of the car buying populace. The PS3 is awesome technology, I think very few people will argue that point. The Wii is using older technologies in new ways, and it's got alot of people intrigued. And as far as a DVD goes, it will more than likely be added in a future software update, and who doesn't have 2 or 3 different ways to play a DVD.

Re:Very good business model....

[Anonymous Coward]

And as far as a DVD goes, it will more than likely be added in a future software update, and who doesn't have 2 or 3 different ways to play a DVD.

This is exactly why I don't care that the Wii doesn't play DVDs. I've got my laptop, my boyfriend's desktop, his PS2, his laptop ...

In all seriousness, it's like everything is a DVD player now. I don't need another one, especially if it would add anything to the cost. I wouldn't pay even $5 extra for DVD playing functionality on my Wii.

Really, the only thing I don't like about it is that it's only 480p when I have a really nice projector that turns my wall into a 10' diagonal 720p TV. Then again, pretty much everything else is 480i or 480p, too, so it's not a huge deal.

Re:Very good business model....

[amuro98]

The PS3 won't make it as a home computer. I doubt that even most Linux hobbyists would bother with a Linux station made out of stripped down PS3 guts.

The PS3 currently costs Sony about $800 to make. Getting rid of Blu-ray, the WiFi adapter, and PS2 hardware might bring the price down to about $500. Note that this is still without monitor, keyboard, mouse, and speakers. Furthermore, customers will have the "joy" of running on a non-x86 processor, meaning they'll have to recompile any piece of software they wish to use. Yeah, that's a great idea for Grandma.

Meanwhile, for $500, you can get a brand name computer from WalMart - with monitor - that has more memory, a larger HDD, AND a LCD panel. It may not be top of the line, it may not be able to play Doom3, but hey, neither would that underpowered Cell-based desktop.

Re:Very good business model....

[zoomzit]

Actually, the reason I think it will sell as a PC is precisely because it isn't a x86. Lots of linux people geek out at the Cell processor, mostly because it is different. If Sony supoorted a usb tv tuner and Myth, there is a nice HTPC to be had at a cheap price. Plus, the PS3 can play some nice games, why wouldn't a box with PS3 guts not play games well? It's powerful hardware that has yet to be optimized. Open up that platform to open-source and find out what the hardware can really do.

Re:Very good business model....

[CronoCloud]

Frankly the PS3 makes a nice little home computer as it is. E-mail, IM, Web Browsing, Open Office. Plust the ability to run graphically intensive games with a quick reboot to GameOS. I don't know why Sony isn't promoting this ability

As for recompiling, the PS3 is in much better shape than the PS2 is with Linux, since the PS3 can run PPC Linux binaries.

Re:Very good business model....

[trdrstv]

It's the same reason a Honda Accord outsells a Porsche 911. It's good, proven technology, that, while not the most powerful or cutting edge, fits the budget of the largest segment of the car buying populace. The PS3 is awesome technology, I think very few people will argue that point. The Wii is using older technologies in new ways, and it's got alot of people intrigued.

Not only does the Accord fit most people's "budget" it also fills their "needs" for a car. Also of note, the Accord may fullfill their needs better than a Porsche making pricing less relevant.

because it's cheaper?

[uepuejq]

i've owned the wii for a while, and i have to say that it is the best console i've had since the super nintendo. i'm 23 years old and i've got friends and family coming over and having a good time, and we still play wii sports. i haven't played the playstation 3, and i'm not going to pretend to have an opinion on the quality of it, but to say the wii is a good model because of its price is a little silly. it has a good price because it's a good model!

Blu-ray is the problem.

[Fross]

A common argument for the high price of the PS3 is that "hey, it includes a blu-ray player!" Which is true, and changes something.

The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

So not only does Sony have part of the market for the next-gen console market with the PS3, but it also has the vast majority of the HD-video market as well.

The sales figures are testament more to the fact that nobody wants HD video at the moment, and forcing people to take it in a bundle is crucifying them. The PS3 may be better than the 360 (the games look about the same to me), but it costs $300 more (at least here in the UK) - that's a lot to a gamer. You can make a car with a gold steering wheel for an extra $50,000, but if nobody *wants* a gold steering wheel, then your car isn't going to sell at all, as good as it is, unless you can sell if without the steering wheel.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[SparkyFlooner]

I have the 360 add-on HD-DVD player, and I find myself ignoring HD-DVD titles and just renting regular DVDs. (and yes, I have an hdtv) Regular DVDs still look good, you know? Even 200 bucks on an HD player seems like too much for what you get. I would've been content watching regular DVDs until the price of an HD player came down to 100 or less.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[afidel]

Well, at $300 more than the 360 it's $100 more than the 360+HD-DVD combo, so they are screwed even if you are looking for a next generation movie player. I personally plan to get the 360 HDDVD drive for my PC, I already have all the gaming I want, plus excellent media center capabilities on the PC, why not add next generation movie capabilities for a third the cost of a PS3 =)

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[zarkill]

I agree... I also have an HDTV, and regular DVDs look great on it.
I mean, I like the way HD looks, but it's just not a big deal to me so I can't picture myself making a major purchase based on it. (In fact, even for my TV I'd say the screen size and small footprint were the biggest attractions, as opposed to the HD picture quality.)

I think I'll be satisfied with regular DVD quality until my DVD player breaks and I can't get a new one. There's just no incentive for me otherwise, unlike making the astronomical leap from VHS to DVD.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[DarkJC]

I don't get it. If the movie is available on both HD-DVD as well as DVD, then why would you pick up the DVD for rental because it "still looks good"? They may still look good, but if you've spent $200 on the player and have an HDTV to take advantage of, why not get something that looks better? Obviously some movies are still only available on DVD, but I assume you're not talking about that.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[DarkJC]

You're applying American prices to UK prices.

In the UK, it costs £381.96 on Amazon for a 360 Premium + HD-DVD player...381.96 GBP = 755.107 USD
It costs £399.99 for a PS3...399.99 GBP = 790.754 USD

Hardly $100. The 360 is slightly discounted on Amazon at the moment as well, otherwise they'd turn out to be the same. And that's with a 360 that lacks an HDMI port..if you wanted one it'd end up costing you more than the PS3.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Do you really have an HDTV, or do you just have a 480p TV? DVDs do generally look nice, but even on an XGA screen, HD-DVD is noticeably nicer, much nicer on higher resolution screens. On something that's 1080p, there is simply no contest, it's not worth passing over the HD discs.

I'm in the market for an HD player because of how nice the 1080p trailers look when I play them through my HTPC, basically looks like a film projection, but without the drawbacks of film projection.

I personally would expect to see $100 HD players in the fall of 2008.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[SparkyFlooner]

You can't rent HD-DVD movies at the video stores yet. And I don't want to buy them. The only way to get them is to use Netflix or Blockbuster online or something...but when I want a movie, I want it NOW. So either I get a regular DVD and watch it tonight, or I wait 2 or 3 days for the HD-DVD version to come in.

"still looks pretty good" outweighs 2-3 days right now. If I could rent HD-DVDs in the store, I'd always pick an HD-DVD over a regular DVD.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[amuro98]

With cheaper blu-ray players coming out (from Sony, no less) the "PS3 is a cheap blu-ray player!" days are over.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[SparkyFlooner]

I have a 1080p SXRD. And yeah, HD-DVD movies do look amazing. But like I said in another post, the HD movies aren't available yet in rental stores, and they're too expensive to buy (and I wouldn't choose a side yet, anyway). It's simply more convenient to get a regular DVD at the store vs waiting for the HD version to arrive in the mail.

So $200 seems expensive because I just don't use it all that much right now. I should've waited until it became more convenient to actually watch HD movies. At that time the players would've come down a lot in price.

Right now, I'm looking at what it will take to just stream movies over the net, and avoid the whole Blu Ray, HD-DVD war entirely.

So ultimately, if I think I paid too much for my HD-DVD player, 600 bucks for a Blu Ray player seems like insanity to me.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[DrEldarion]

There's a lot more to using blu-ray than just promoting a new format (though I'm sure that's part of it). With gaming this gen, games are going to be LARGE. We already saw PS2 games spanning multiple DVDs, so it makes sense to move to a bigger storage medium as standard. It's already been stated that Resistance would have had to be on two dual-layer DVDs, and Rockstar said they're having issues with storage space on the 360 version. Not including a better drive in the 360, to me, shows a pretty big lack of foresight (the Wii is different since it's standard-def).

Sony wants the PS3 to be something amazing - the total experience. It definitely has the potential to be that, whereas the Wii (especially) and the 360 are likely to show growing pains over the next couple years.

Now we just need the games... :/

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[toolie]

The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

So not only does Sony have part of the market for the next-gen console market with the PS3, but it also has the vast majority of the HD-video market as well.

The sales figures are testament more to the fact that nobody wants HD video at the moment, and forcing people to take it in a bundle is crucifying them.

One of the biggest problems I see with using the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player is its form factor. It won't fit in a normal component cabinet, or a rack unless it is on the top shelf. A player is designed and shaped the way it is for a specific reason. Applying a different footprint for the same thing isn't going to make adopting it any easier, unless it is significantly smaller. I would rather spend the $800 for a regular player that is going to fit in my current setup than $600 that I need to adapt my setup to accept.

That said, if it had some games that I liked or were interested in, I wouldn't mind adapting my entertainment center at all.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

But you have to admit, it's very efficient of Sony to release a system that's not only a game console with no games for it but also a media player with no movies for it.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[SparkyFlooner]

Agreed. More space can only be a good thing. The problem is if PS3 doesn't really land many exclusives, all the 'cool' games will be designed for multiple consoles using the least common denominator, which is DVD. So sure there's more space on a Blu Ray disk, and the games could look and sound better on a PS3, but the space wouldn't really be used for gameplay.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

Why do people insist on perpetuating this myth. It was true for maybe 15 minutes after the PS3 was released...but now there are plenty of Blu-Ray players that are cheaper than a PS3.

I hate this charge towards all-in-one gadgets that the electronics industry seems to have engaged in.

I want a cell-phone that is just a GOOD cell-phone
I want a media player that is just good at playing media
and I want a gaming platform that JUST PLAYS GAMES!.

Oh wait...I'll go play with my Wii. Then maybe later I'll play some video games.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[prockcore]

f the movie is available on both HD-DVD as well as DVD, then why would you pick up the DVD for rental because it "still looks good"?

Probably because HD-DVD/Bluray rentals are more expensive than DVD rentals. That and blockbuster and friends don't even carry HD-DVD/Bluray rentals.

Re:Blu-ray is the problem.

[SC Ghost]

obviously Sony isn't that stupid; they know that the PS3 isn't making them the kind of money that they want, partially if not mainly because of its price. and their goal isn't to lose money on their product. after considering all of the expenses it costs to actually make a PS3 (staff, hard ware, shipping, advertising ect...) they at least have to make a minimum amount of cash to cover all of that, and then they want to land in the positive end of sales rather than negative or some one is getting their ass fired. sooo... obviously all of the expenses that the PS3 costs Sony aren't as much as their original price, and presumably, are also not as much as the "revised" price. assuming Sony is just like any other capitalistic corporation who's only real goals are to make more money and not please anyone (even if they have to please people to make money) they are going to shoot for a product that costs them the minimum to make, and they can still sell it for the maximum. Well assuming that the $600 price tag was over the maximum value to most target consumers (seeing as hardly anyone bought it); and also judging by the fact that they were overly ambitious, hoping that people would actually pay $600 to play a few games and watch a few movies once in a while (minus the hardcore gamers i.e. target consumers). then they probably aren't going to lower their standards too much with the "revised" price. since in the first place they wanted to make Uber cash with the $600 price tag, they most likely still want to make a lot, but also still want to sell the PS3. in conclusion; I'd say they are still going to have a fairly high price tag, say around the same as the 360, even though the actual financial worth of it all isn't as much the actual price. oh and for every one who thinks people are buying it JUST for the blue-ray because its the cheapest one out there, i just saw a blue-ray DVD player on the best buy website for $500 as opposed to the currently $600 PS3.

Hope...

[MeanderingMind]

I sincerely hope Sony doesn't believe Nintendo is beating them simply because of price.

I sincerely believe they aren't that silly, but these days you never can tell.

Re:Hope...

[Chris Burke]

One thing at a time, man. They can only have so many revelations at a time.

Obviously the price is significant, only complete morons thought it wasn't, by which I mean Sony execs. They're slowly figuring out that a $600 console is inherently unappealing and will never be mass-market.

Once they've wrapped their head around that concept, then they can start figuring out the other problems with their strategy.

Re:Hope...

[Pluvius]

Certainly Sony knows that the Wii is currently selling because of a combination of price and hype. Hype wasn't mentioned because the question Stringer was asked was about the PS3's price. You'll notice that Sony is trying to combat the hype problem elsewhere, like in their new blog.

BTW, here is a transcript of the interview in question. You'll also notice that Stringer did counterargue the idea that the Wii is selling better because it's more fun.

Rob

Re:Hope...

[Abcd1234]

Certainly Sony knows that the Wii is currently selling because of a combination of price and hype.

What you call hype, I call positive reviews (and evidence of your pre-existing bias against the system). It makes no sense, six months after the system's release, to refer to the current ferver over the Wii as hype. Hype, to me, implies a lack of evidence. But at this point, it's pretty clear the Wii is delivering on it's promise (though, admittedly, the current game selection is a bit limited... 'course, this was also true of the DS for a while following it's release, a situation that has since been remedied).

You'll also notice that Stringer did counterargue the idea that the Wii is selling better because it's more fun.

No he didn't. All he said was "no no no". That's not an argument, that's an opinion. And honestly, what can you expect? It would be a cold day in hell long before he would ever be allowed to admit that the Wii might actually be more fun than the PS3.

Re:Hope...

[Pluvius]

What you call hype, I call positive reviews

Positive reviews of what? Only one Wii game has a score of over 90% on Game Rankings, and it's not an exclusive. Only four others (one not exclusive) have a score of over 80%. Only two games have had enduring popularity among Wii owners, and one of them is the tech demo that came with the system. And in my experience, plenty of those owners have talked about how their Wiis have been gathering dust since they got bored with playing said tech demo. It's just anecdotal evidence, but the sheer number of people saying basically the same thing, as well as the fact that software sales haven't really been keeping pace with hardware sales, suggests a trend.

All he said was "no no no". That's not an argument, that's an opinion.

There are a bunch of sentences after "no no no." Perhaps you should read them.

Rob

Re:Hope...

[Abcd1234]

Positive reviews of what?

Of the console design and control system, of course. I already addressed the fact that games have been somewhat lackluster (though, relative to the PS3 lineup, the Wii is doing stellar). But the system has demonstrated it's potential, and people are happy with it. Meanwhile, I've yet to see a review that casts the Wii in a negative light. So either the hype continues unabated, and Nintendo is crushing all negative press, or your view of things is just a tad skewed.

There are a bunch of sentences after "no no no." Perhaps you should read them.

Maybe you should, as you apparently don't understand what he said. Here, I'll quote the text for you:

I think PlayStation 3 is following a particular trend of 1 and 2, and if you looked at the history of it, it's a very similar history. It takes a long time for producers, and more time because of the cost factor, to embrace the full bandwidth of PlayStation 3. It's only using 20% of it right now. And producers will always wait to see how it's going, and once they use the full bandwidth the games experience is stunning. And while people have not bought as many PlayStation 3s as it looks, it is no different from PS2 and PS1 in terms of percentage of sales, and it is an experience that is dazzling. People who play it, using only 20% of the bandwidth, are perfectly happy playing it and their games will get better.

To paraphrase: "The PS3 sales are following those of the PS1 and 2. Once developers learn to use our awesome hardware, the games will be awesome, and the PS3 will start selling like hotcakes"

The thing is, that's not an answer to the question "Is the Wii more fun", unless you equate "fun" with "neato graphics" (which, apparently, Sony does). That's just the same line they've been trotting out for quite a long time now about why the PS3 isn't selling. Does he address the issue of control systems? No. Does he address the issue of lackluster, same-same game lineup? No (aside from the comment about technology, but I consider that tangental). Hell, the best part is when he says:

Most of the games are not third-party games yet; they're mostly our own games and we've got Home coming out;

Translation: Even we, the guys who invented the damn thing, can't create a game for the PS3 that fully utilizes the hardware onboard. If that isn't a bad sign, I don't know what is.

Re:Hope...

[Pluvius]

Of the console design and control system, of course.

How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

I already addressed the fact that games have been somewhat lackluster (though, relative to the PS3 lineup, the Wii is doing stellar).

The PS3 has several more high-rated games than the Wii does, not to mention better third-party support. Not that that's relevant, since we're talking about the performance of the Wii in general in this case, not just in relation to the PS3.

But the system has demonstrated it's potential

If the games for it are lackluster, then how has it demonstrated its potential?

Maybe you should, as you apparently don't understand what he said.

I understand exactly what he said; that there's nothing about the Wii that makes it inherently "more fun" than the PS3. You might have more fun with it if you like party games with gratuitous waggle to the exclusion of everything else, but there are a lot of people who don't.

The thing is, that's not an answer to the question "Is the Wii more fun", unless you equate "fun" with "neato graphics" (which, apparently, Sony does).

Because of course, increased processing power and media capacity can only be used to improve graphics.

Does he address the issue of control systems? No.

Because it's not an issue. There's still been nothing on the Wii that's justified the hype over the Wiimote. Not to mention the damage that the different control scheme does to third-party support. Hell, there's even the fact that the Sixaxis has had some decent games designed for it, such as flOw and Super Rub-a-Dub, without compromising playability for games with traditional controls.

Does he address the issue of lackluster, same-same game lineup? No

Because the Wii has the same problem.

Translation: Even we, the guys who invented the damn thing, can't create a game for the PS3 that fully utilizes the hardware onboard.

You think that any first-party developers fulfill the potential of their systems in the first generation? Seriously? Even the Wii hasn't been stretched to its limits despite being underpowered.

Rob

Re:Hope...

[MeanderingMind]

How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

A console without controllers is nothing more than a paperweight.

That sentence can be reworked for everything from players, to TVs, to Pluto. It is true that a console requires good games, but it is also true that control and design are also important.

The PS3 has several more high-rated games than the Wii does, not to mention better third-party support. Not that that's relevant, since we're talking about the performance of the Wii in general in this case, not just in relation to the PS3.

It'll summarize my response to the reviews because otherwise I could write a dissertation. The games industry has, for some but not all time, been a single demographic. The games were written by that demographic, played by the demographic, and reviewed by that demographic. The industry slowly chopped away people who did not exactly fit into this demographic. Given that many Wii titles are not aimed at this demographic, can we expect them to be reviewed favorably?

That doesn't mean the Wii is some paragon of awesome, but it should give one pause when considering how we weight various measurements of success for games.

If the games for it are lackluster, then how has it demonstrated its potential?

The issue isn't that all games for either the PS3 or Wii are lackluster, but that most of them are. As such, it is possible that the Wii's potential has been demonstrated by one of the titles that isn't lackluster.

I understand exactly what he said; that there's nothing about the Wii that makes it inherently "more fun" than the PS3. You might have more fun with it if you like party games with gratuitous waggle to the exclusion of everything else, but there are a lot of people who don't.

Because of course, increased processing power and media capacity can only be used to improve graphics.

You're missing his point. The point is that regardless of how fun or not fun the Wii is, and regardless of whether or not the PS3's assets allow it to be fun or more fun than the Wii, Stringer gave nothing in the quoted material about how fun the Wii was. There was nothing good or bad about it, nothing supporting previous statements. This point isn't about his or your opinions on the subject, but Stringer's.

Because it's not an issue. There's still been nothing on the Wii that's justified the hype over the Wiimote. Not to mention the damage that the different control scheme does to third-party support. Hell, there's even the fact that the Sixaxis has had some decent games designed for it, such as flOw and Super Rub-a-Dub, without compromising playability for games with traditional controls.

Because the Wii has the same problem.

It is an issue, because it's the very basis of Nintedo's console. In fact it's the very basis of all video games, player input. The wars over whether PCs or consoles are better for FPSs attest to this.

If Stringer thinks that the Wii hasn't had any games that justify the unique controls he could have said as much. If he thought that the SIXAXIS was matching up to it because of fl0w and other games he could have mentioned it. If he felt that both consoles were struggling to get good titles out, he could have voiced his thoughts and how his company was going to do a better job of breaking the stagnation thannNintendo. The issue that the GP is highlighting is that Stringer was asked a very straightforward question and didn't give an answer at all relevant to it. Our opinions of the Wii and PS3 aside, it seems strange that Stringer didn't comment.

Whether unable (due to PR restrictions) or unwilling (for whatever reason), he completely avoided the question. That's the fundamental issue here.

Re:Hope...

[MeanderingMind]

Bah, I missed the preview key accidentally. Serves me right.

Here's the fixed version.

How can you possibly separate discussion of the console from the discussion of its games? A console without games is nothing more than a paperweight.

A console without controllers is nothing more than a paperweight.

That sentence can be reworked for everything from players, to TVs, to Pluto. It is true that a console requires good games, but it is also true that control and design are also important.

The PS3 has several more high-rated games than the Wii does, not to mention better third-party support. Not that that's relevant, since we're talking about the performance of the Wii in general in this case, not just in relation to the PS3.

It'll summarize my response to the reviews because otherwise I could write a dissertation. The games industry has, for some but not all time, been a single demographic. The games were written by that demographic, played by the demographic, and reviewed by that demographic. The industry slowly chopped away people who did not exactly fit into this demographic. Given that many Wii titles are not aimed at this demographic, can we expect them to be reviewed favorably?

That doesn't mean the Wii is some paragon of awesome, but it should give one pause when considering how we weight various measurements of success for games.

If the games for it are lackluster, then how has it demonstrated its potential?

The issue isn't that all games for either the PS3 or Wii are lackluster, but that most of them are. As such, it is possible that the Wii's potential has been demonstrated by one of the titles that isn't lackluster.

I understand exactly what he said; that there's nothing about the Wii that makes it inherently "more fun" than the PS3. You might have more fun with it if you like party games with gratuitous waggle to the exclusion of everything else, but there are a lot of people who don't.

Because of course, increased processing power and media capacity can only be used to improve graphics.

You're missing his point. The point is that regardless of how fun or not fun the Wii is, and regardless of whether or not the PS3's assets allow it to be fun or more fun than the Wii, Stringer gave nothing in the quoted material about how fun the Wii was. There was nothing good or bad about it, nothing supporting previous statements. This point isn't about his or your opinions on the subject, but Stringer's.

Because it's not an issue. There's still been nothing on the Wii that's justified the hype over the Wiimote. Not to mention the damage that the different control scheme does to third-party support. Hell, there's even the fact that the Sixaxis has had some decent games designed for it, such as flOw and Super Rub-a-Dub, without compromising playability for games with traditional controls.

Because the Wii has the same problem.

It is an issue, because it's the very basis of Nintedo's console. In fact it's the very basis of all video games, player input. The wars over whether PCs or consoles are better for FPSs attest to this.

If Stringer thinks that the Wii hasn't had any games that justify the unique controls he could have said as much. If he thought that the SIXAXIS was matching up to it because of fl0w and other games he could have mentioned it. If he felt that both consoles were struggling to get good titles out, he could have voiced his thoughts and how his company was going to do a better job of breaking the stagnation thannNintendo. The issue that the GP is highlighting is that Stringer was asked a very straightforward question and didn't give an answer at all relevant to it. Our opinions of the Wii and PS3 aside, it seems strange that Stringer didn't comment.

Whether unable (due to PR rest

No, don't!

[mattgreen]

I prefer to think of my video gaming experience as a fine dining experience, as Sony so helpfully suggested. I cannot believe they would betray my trust by discounting their truly unique console to McDonald's-level prices. They've already said it was too cheap, and now they would cheapen it further? Traitorous hounds!

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[goodenoughnickname]

Yeah, but sliding the SIXAXIS back and forth is going to make the PS3 version kick ass.

Lower game prices

[Anonymous Coward]

Screw lowering the console price, that's going to happen anyway. Lower the damn game prices! $69 for the garbage that was Spiderman 3? Ridiculous...

Re:Lower game prices

[Anonymous Coward]

The games are where they make the money (after selling the system at a ~$200 loss).

You learn something new every day

[Chelloveck]

'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,'

And here I thought the reason for the Wii's success relative to the PS3 is because the Wii has games that don't suck. What a fool I was.

Re:You learn something new every day

[mschallmo]

I don't know about that. I have a Wii and I'm finding it very hard outside of Zelda and Paper Mario to find a game that keeps my interest for more than a week. The vast majority of Wii games in my opinion "suck", but maybe that's just me. I think the real thing that has the Wii selling like hotcakes is the fact that a non-gamer audience is rushing out to buy it after a fellow gamer turns on Wii Sports and lets them get few games in. Non-gamers seem to love how easy it is to play. My parents (furthest thing from gamers and in their late 50's) went out and bought a Wii after playing Wii Sports and that's all they've been playing and they are completely content. They show it to their friends and the cycle repeats. Same thing for my friends and other family members. The problem is, there are no other games out there that are going to have the same effect. The hype is going to fade as people start to realize that the Wiimote isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread and their isn't anything else out there comparable to Wii Sports. I mean shit, my grandmother liked bowling, but she will never be able to move to another game and I think many others will be surprised when they try other games and don't get the same experience.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[famikon]

I believe the Sixaxis has tilt sensors only, not accellerometers. (I know you were joking but at least I didn't answer your sarcasm with some type of math equation explaining the whole thing)

sigh...

[djupedal]

The PS3 is a wonderful device. It has amazing abilities and is a shining example of what one company can do when all the stops are pulled and the horizon is just the beginning.

Sound familiar?

Until Sony admits they are selling the console equivalent of the Bugatti Veyron, nothing much is going to change in the marketplace. Consider the commonalities. Exceptional performance; pushing the envelope; losing considerable amounts of money when each one is sold? Rabid fans line up to buy one. Not much you can do but show it off to your friends. All that power seems a bit out of reach for practical purposes. Flagship for the company.

Ok, Sony - the PS3 is a milestone - sure to go down in history. Nothing can compare. Now, how about cranking out millions of units that can be enjoyed by the masses. Something more timely, practical and compatible. You can do it - I have faith. You just need to forget bluesky marketing and get back to making and selling what the public not only wants, but can use...today.

Re:sigh...

[Ant P.]

Ok, Sony - the PS3 is a milestone - sure to go down in history. Nothing can compare.

Saturn? Dreamcast? Neo-Geo?

Re:sigh...

[Deliveranc3]

Dreamcast?

Blasphemy MOTHER FUCKER! Do you speak it?!

But seriously, if the ps3 had the possibility of being the next dreamcast, I'd actually buy one!

Re:sigh...

[tb()ne]

Until Sony admits they are selling the console equivalent of the Bugatti Veyron, nothing much is going to change in the marketplace. Consider the commonalities. Exceptional performance; pushing the envelope; losing considerable amounts of money when each one is sold? Rabid fans line up to buy one. Not much you can do but show it off to your friends. All that power seems a bit out of reach for practical purposes. Flagship for the company.

The problem with your example is that the Bugatti Veyron would likely be impractical for most people, even at an affordable price. The PS3 doesn't look so bad when you consider that most of the "commonalities" you list also exist between the PS3 and PS2. And the PS2 was (and still is) quite successful.

Re:sigh...

[Ant P.]

Yeah, sorry about that. Guess I'm still bitter that they killed off Shenmue mid-series.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[DarkJC]

And you would be wrong. It can detect motion along the "six" axes, including x, y, and z. It's pretty much the same tech as the Wii controller in a differently shaped package.

Whet they really should do...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Refine" the PS3 to a bloat-free game-only console and the price will automatically adjust to $300 (or Euro).

If I wan't a PC I get one for $100 (or Euro) (If I haven't already one).

If I want to watch (DivX) Movies or listen to MP3 in my living rooms I get a stand alone DivX/MP3 player for $40 (or Euro) (If I haven't already one).

But who cares.

Re:Whet they really should do...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Refine" the PS3 to a bloat-free game-only console and the price will automatically adjust to $300 (or Euro).

They already developed that. It's called the PS2. MS sells the low-end 360 for $299 and that was at a loss. You're suggesting that Sony build a last gen console. Fortunately, they won't do that.

If I wan't a PC I get one for $100 (or Euro) (If I haven't already one).

$100? You're either unaware of current exchange rates or your expectations for a PC are somewhere near the bottom 5th percentile.

In related news...

[scolen2]

Sony has removed the BD drive, wifi, Bluetooth, and half of the cells from the powerful IBM cell processor and is now selling the newly branded "PS3 n00b" to compeat with microsofts recently announced 360 Elite.

Re:In related news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony fanboys have already lined up everywhere to buy their second PS3 and show Microsoft how 1337 they are.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[AuMatar]

Well, ignoring the idiocy of 6 axises (there's a mathermatical maximum of N axises in N dimensional space), the hardware is *NOT* anywhere near the same. They have similar enough motion sensing hardware, but the PS3 has no position sensing software. Nintendo does this via the sensor bar and 2 LEDs embedded in the controller. With the leds on the controller and the sensors on the bars, it can triangulate a precise position and angle in space. The PS3 can't do that. If you were to use a PS3 in a motion detecting game, you'd notice that fine positioning would be a little off, and the more you movedthe further off it would get.

Re:You fail it

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear scolen2,

I have read your recent post and have judged it a troll. However, I have looked over some of your posting history and deemed that you may have a future as a valuable contributing member of /. if you would mature just a little bit.

Please learn to spell a bit better and think before you type. I'm sure that you can not only become a better poster but a better human being as well.

Yours truly,
AC

Scoring system not working

[jkro]

The scoring system in /. is not working. It does not do what it was supposed to do, meaning promote interesting opinions. The system as is can easily be highjack and this is what happened in this case. The two posting is moderated funny (5) the second troll (1) where the first is not really funny the other is not a troll. Of course what is funny and what is a troll is a matter of opinion and I agree that everyone is entitled to their opinion. What I propose is a user selectable option to disable displaying of the scores. And I mean completely, no points and no categories. This way one could read the discussion without being influenced by others. In other words: facts not commentaries.

Re:Scoring system not working

[daemonaetea]

I think in this case that, while Troll might not have been the correct marking for that post, it was closest to what was called for, which would be Stupid. He responded to an obvious joke post as if it was serious, and then began to point out that people like things on sale. Not inciting any flaming, perhaps, but still not at all helpful.

Re:Scoring system not working

[jkro]

I would like to judge if something is funny, troll or stupid for myself and I do not care for other people opinions. I just ask for an option not to see them, that's it.

Re:Scoring system not working

[Anonymous Coward]

Just do what I do and set the threshold at -1.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[Akaihiryuu]

Close, but you've got it backwards. The sensors are in the controller and the LED's are in the bar. The "sensor bar" is misnamed, it's really just a plastic bar with 10 IR LED's in it...no sensors at all. The sensing hardware is *all* in the controller. How it works is very easy to see with a digital camera, as virtually all digital cameras can see IR very well:

http://akaihiryuu.dyndns.org:8008/~akai/pictures/s ensor_bar_in_ir.jpg

Not So Farfetched

[blueZhift]

Sony releasing a new stripped down version of the PS3 may not be so farfetched, but it would take some serious cast iron balls to do it at this point. I heard elsewhere that the price of Sony blu-ray players has come down which could be a signal that the PS3 might be relieved of its duties as the cheapest BD player...or not! The biggest problem with removing the BD player are the games that have already been released on BD. Pulling the drive would mean reissuing games on DVD(s), a nontrivial feat. But if Sony is desperate enough, and strong enough to admit they were wrong, it could be done.

This isn't very likely, but I'd love to see them try. Success would be like the New Coke story of the console industry.

Re:In other news, PS3 to lose more money than befo

[ClamIAm]

Here's a radical idea: maybe Sony aren't losing money on PS3s. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but there has never been any confirmed report from inside Sony about how much the PS3 costs to make. Also, it is absolutely stupid to not take into consideration what the manufacturing cost is now, compared to at launch.

I get very tired of people repeating this over and over, with no confirmation to back it up.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[bucky0]

Are you the guy that argued with me about this a couple months ago?

Which 6 axes are being detected?

The Godfather rules.

[LKM]

This isn't the first time I've recommended The Godfater: Blackhand Edition, and it probably won't be the last time. Yes, EA sucks. Yes, Godfather has crappy graphics on the Wii. But seriously, playing it just feels incredibly right. You hit somebody with your fist. he goes to his knees. You grab him by the colar, hit him again, yank him up, drag him to the roof's edge and throw him off. All with ultrarealistic gestures. I have no idea how the story is, because I basically just run around and beat up cops and people. It's easily the most violent and most fun game I've ever played. I don't really like GTA, but this game simply rules.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[LKM]

So, what are the other three axes?

The Wii has a "Sixaxis"-style motion sensor in both the remote and the nunchuck. In addition to that, it has a camera in the Remote which can be used to point at the screen. The Sixaxis is the crippled, retarded cousin of the Wii Remote.

Where have you been for the last 5 years.

[Fross]

The PS3 cost more to make than the $600 is was sold for. From Wikipedia, "The initial production cost has been estimated to be USD 805.85 for the 20 GB model and USD 840.35 for the 60 GB model." It may have dropped a little now, but they're certainly not raking it in - I expect they're still losing money. If they wanted to make any profit, the PS3 would have to sell for $1000 at least.

Every modern console, except the Wii, has been sold at a loss during its launch. Microsoft lost over $4 BILLION over the first few years of the original XBox. The idea is that profit is made over game and accessory sales, and eventually on the console as large-scale manufacturing and aging technology causes the unit production costs to drop below sale price. The important thing in these last two generations of console wars is market share, that's where they've been pouring the money in to.

I'm afraid you have a lot of details to catch up on.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[DarkJC]

There was a reason I put the six in quotes. I guess that doesn't seem to register past you people as I still got a bunch of pundits looking for a semantics battle replying. What you were supposed to take away from my post is that it can detect more than tilt, it can detect sliding movement in a direction. One studio is in the process of making a bowling game ala Wii Sports Bowling, and correct me if I'm wrong but this does indeed require accelerometers.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[DarkJC]

I didn't say it wasn't. I'm saying that the assertion that it only has tilt sensors is wrong. It doesn't take much for the Wii-lovers/Sony-haters to come out of the woodwork, ready to battle an argue of semantics over what six axes it operates on.

Hint: there was a reason it was in quotes. I don't even know why you brought the Wiimote into this, as it really had nothing to do with what I was correcting. Makes you come off as a fanboy.

Re:"..and then you will begin to see break-out gam

[LKM]

I don't even know why you brought the Wiimote into this

Uh... WTF? You wrote "It's pretty much the same tech as the Wii controller."

Makes you come off as a fanboy.

Yeah. You know, about that... Something really funny. Whenever somebody brings up that argument, it's always because he can't come up with any real arguments. Which kind of points towards you as the "fanboy."

It all seems so obvious but...

[Incompetnce]

I got the chance to play on a MegaDrive again recently. We picked up Micro Machines 2 for 95p (less than the price of a cup of coffee) from a charity shop. We played around with that for good long while. We've also had marathon sessions on Streets of Rage 2 and several sonic games. Next I'm hoping to find a second hand dreamcast, or maybe I'll dig out my N64 and play all the great games I have on that. This rediscovery of all my old games, and finding that I still enjoy playing Perfect Dark or Road Rash 64 means that I am even less inclined to buy a PS3. I have a lot of PS2 games, but the backward compatibility is not a selling point here. I'd rather buy a Wii or even a 360 (now that they have sorted the heating problem, possibly) than the PS3.

I think they really shot themselves in the foot coming out so long after the 360 and pricing it so far above Microsoft's console. The Wii is another matter, it is so different, and relatively cheap, that it's almost as if it is not in direct competition with Sony and Microsoft. Those two consoles ARE in direct competition, because most people are going to buy only one of either the PS3 or the XBox 360. In this direct competition Sony have lost out by letting microsoft get out a good range of games and having the edge in terms of pricing. Both these factors will do a lot to swing those people who are not waiting specifically for some game on whatever platform.

At any given time since the PS3's launch I could have looked at the games available on each console and the prices of each and decided immediately that it was a choice between Wii and XBox 360. I'm sure other people have been in the same situation as I am and many of them will have acted on their decision before now. Sony has lost all of these customers because the PS3 is too expensive and the range of games is too small and severely lacking in blockbuster titles.

Pretty much all of this is really obvious, so I do wonder if Sony don't have some masterplan which involves the PS3 actually underperforming, lulling MS and Nintendo into a false sense of security, before Sony deals the death blow to their rivals...

Easy Solution!

[Plekto]

If they dropped the Blu-Ray drive and shipped it with a normal dual-layer DVD player, they could drop the price to about $250. The drive is a $250 component right there. Now, that's a fantastic price for one, but the total price is too high.

And to add insult to injury, they charge $100 more for the better version, which ships with a hard drive the size of a postage stamp. Everyone I know who has one has swapped a 300gig drive in instead.

To date, there aren't any games that require Blu-Ray that I know of. Or none that a second dual-layer DVD that you load onto the HD wouldn't fix.