Slashdot Mirror
Gamers Don't Know Their Own Consoles
deadmantyping writes "Ars Technica reports on a survey of 6,260 responses which indicates that only 40 percent of PS3 owners knew that their console included Bluray. Apparently a large portion of gamers aren't aware of the non-gaming capabilities of their systems. Ars speculates that this might help explain Nintendo's apparent dominance in the console market since their introduction of the Wii."
Blu-Ray isn't ubiquitous, no HD format is yet. There's nary a Blu-Ray market out there at this point, not something most people even know exists unless they go looking for it.
If blockbuster all of a sudden is half full of Blu-Ray disks, people will become very aware of the PS3's capabilities, just as they did with the PS2.
PS2 was a huge driving factor in the final surge of DVD uptake...but DVD's were known to all by that point.
People certainly read on the box that the PS3 supports Blu-Ray, but it means nothing except to very few. The HDDVD addon for the 360 is in a worse boat as that is it's ONLY function.
Me, I'm just waiting for Blu-Ray to catch on (or not). If it does, I'll buy a PS3, and it'll be my HD player of choice...just as my PS2 has been my sole DVD player for years now.
No Comment.
While I LOVE all the things I can do with my 360 and my PS3 in terms of extra stuff beyond gaming, gaming is why I bought a GAMING CONSOLE. Yes, I do use them for things other than gaming, but honestly I would be very very happy if Microsoft and Sony had spent more money and R&D time in making their systems better gamingconsoles, and less of a multi-use piece of hardware.
It raises the functionality of the consoles, but I would much rather be paying less for less functionality. The less I shell out for the console, the more I can spend on the games...which is exactly why I want a gaming console in the first place.
Living With a Nerd
Of the three current "next gen" consoles, it's kind of ironic that the most popular one with the party gamers is the one that *doesn't* do HD. Considering that the Wii's the one most geared towards groups of people standing in front of a large TV screen.
one thing interests the majority of consumers: games
Of course games are the primary reason people buy gaming system.
not only are people not using these functions, they're not even aware of them.
the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.
Considering many games are cross platform, the PS2 is still on the market with new titles, and the PS3 is the most expensive system available, there is little justification to buying one at the moment.
the higher cost of entry may be helping the PlayStation 3 in this respect.
Since when does higher cost mean higher quality, regardless of what it can do?
...however I sure would like to have more information about things like:
- can the controller be used wirelessly to control the playing?
- does the ps3 have an IR receiver so I can program my existing remote to control it like a stand-alone blue-ray player?
- does the ps3 support blue-ray profile 1.1 (with dual decoding)?
- how is the quality compared to a stand-alone player?
- does the ps3 have a digital out to feed to my receiver? (coax? optical?)
these are questions that right now have prevented me from purchasing one in favour of waiting for a combo blueray/hddvd player (if not I'd just get a ps3+x360 since they'd cost me the same in total and I'd have two consoles to boot). I have also found things like the following by perusing sites, things that should be made clear somewhere on sony's site
- the ps3 does play dvd movies
- the ps3 does NOT upscale dvd movies to 1080i/p
- the ps3 supports 1080p/24 starting from firmware 1.9
I think sony is trying hard to not position the ps3 as a blueray player with gaming capabilities, and holding back information like this is part of the game.
-- the cake is a lie
If we assume that these figures apply to the population at large as Ars did when they speculated that this explains the Wii's dominance, then this means that 40% of the population is aware of PS3's BluRay capabilities. Yet they're not choosing to buy a PS3.
Because knowing the PS3 has BluRay doesn't cause an extra $350 to spontaneously appear in your wallet.
"Good value for what you get if you can/will use all of its features" does not translate into "I can afford to spend that much on a toy".
It's not complicated.
The enemies of Democracy are
Correction: Most people who buy a Wii don't care what the differences in the hardware specs are between the systems. They only look at the gameplay.
Microsoft and Sony don't know their customers.
I just found out a few days ago that my grandmother, who is in her 70s, used a Nintendo Wii at my brother's house. She is a golfer, and she played Wii Golf for her first time, and she proceeded to play extremely well, and easily beat my brother.
So, Wii is full of win because my non-gaming grandmother can play, and succeed, at a video game without a bunch of hassle.
It wouldn't matter to her if it could play movies or dispense kittens, and I'd imagine those things don't matter much to others, either. Though, kittens would be cute.
I don't know how much more they could've said it. Every time their PR people open their mouths it's "Blu-ray" this and "computer in your living room" that.
Trick is, it's a Playstation. Playstation is now synonymous with 'games' they way Nintendo is. You could print in big block letters "THIS THING DOES NOT PLAY GAMES" and people would still buy the PS3 to play games and nothing more.
It goes back to the 'don't care' portion of your rhetorical. They simply don't care. Regardless of how you position these boxes, gamers just want to play games.
Similarly: Nintendo isn't winning because they stayed away from HD and next-gen disc formats. They stayed away last-gen and that didn't help them any. The Wii is selling like gangbusters because it provides a social game experience that's unmatched anywhere else. Nintendo focused on what gamers were focused on: the fun. If the Wii did HD video it'd still be selling like gangbusters: and their HD cables would be just as under-utilized as those of the 360 and PS3.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
Most iPod owners don't know that you can play games on their iPod.
Most iPod owners don't know that you can load Linux on their iPod.
The the primary function of a device is the the most important function for the people that buy that device.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Correction: Most people who buy a Wii are seeing overwhelming positive press coupled with an effective advertising campaign. Adding to this is the fact the Wii has proven most successful at engaging people in local multiplayer gaming, which improves word of mouth advertising.
Correction: people buy the Wii because it's fun, pure and simple.
Username taken, please choose another one.
A handful of early adopters is not a sizable market. You're just subsidizing manufacturing line refreshes and ramp-up that will give the rest of us the same stuff for half as much in two years or so. Thanks for that, BTW.
Because the N64 was a big letdown, and people didn't want to be burned again.
Seriously, a large part of a console's success is owed to how well the previous generation was recieved. In actuality, the GameCube was recieved VERY WELL, even if it didn't sell very well. It cleared up about 90% of the mistakes that Nintendo had made with the N64 (which lost them control), but it was going to take another generation for sales to really reflect that. Hence the popularity of the Wii.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.