Oh, come on. You seem to be proceeding on the assumptions that a) a significant percentage of the owners of the other two consoles didn't have Xbox as well and b) the console market is the same as it was in 2001 (it's not).
Halo 2 was one of the biggest videogame releases ever, and a huge percentage of the people who bought and loved Halo 2 still don't have an Xbox 360. Thus, a large number of those people will have increased interest in the Xbox 360 when Halo 3 is released, and I'm sure many of those folks will have to choose between Xbox 360 and PS3 - a choice in which available games (particularly one which they've been anticipating) will play an important part.
Again, I'm not a big Halo fan myself (just not that into FPS games anymore). But the idea that the first two games haven't generated a huge fanbase - a fanbase that will want to play the third game ASAP - is without merit.
Further, if we're going to use history as a guide, the PS2 launch lineup sucked hard. If the PS3 doesn't have a strong batch of games, the launch could really turn sour with the 360 getting its year-two lineup (not to mention the fact that there will be many 360s in stock by then while the PS3 could end up being another hard-to-find console at launch)...
You're right to the extent that you've successfully restated what has actually been said. Where I think you go a bit wonky is in your implication that the delay in Japan means nothing in terms of the US launch. If they can't get the PS3 released in Japan before fall/winter that means they would have less leeway to produce sufficient stock for a US launch this year. In other words, Sony would end up in the same situation as Microsoft with the Xbox 360, launching the system in multiple markets without enough hardware to satisfy demand.
So, while no delay has been announced for the US launch one can reasonably infer that even if some US PS3s are shipped, Sony will not be able to ship as many as they would have if they had been able to make their planned spring launch in Japan. It could technically be considered no delay if each US store gets one to five PS3s to sell before December 31st, but it really is a delay since most of the people who would want them won't be able to get them.
GP's post was poorly constructed, but I believe he meant that a Halo 3 launch at the time of the release of PS3 is possible again now that the PS3 has been officially delayed. Thus, the Halo 3 launch would again be a threat to Sony.
Since I'm not a big Halo fan (though I liked the Xbox), I can't say that it would be a big deal to me. But, if Halo 3 "rocks" and brings a big new audience to the 360, that would indeed be bad for Sony. Worse for them would be if MS could find away to drop the price of the 360 in time for the PS3 launch - now that would certainly decrease demand for the Sony console. Of course, if Sony doesn't have the supply to meet the demand anyway they'll be able to, like Microsoft, declare success no matter how well the 360 is doing at the time...
Think about it though: shipping with Linux might just create a vector for undermining the DRM on the Blu-Ray HD movies playable on this console.
That vector will already be in place when BR and HD-DVD drives are available to stick into a PC - something which could very well happen before the PS3 hits the US market, and almost certainly before PS3 supply is able to meet PS3 demand.
Nice link! I mean, damn, in that previous comment you basically say "I don't think it will cost that much" and then proceed to explain why using no concrete examples, no information about actual costs of the new hardware (just a few WAGs about costs of current hardware) and, best of all, no links to any solid information...and you managed to turn that into another "informative" point of karma. Well done!
Here's the problem: As far as I've been able to find out, the law does not say anything as specific as "you can't sell games rated 'M' by the ESRB to minors" or "you can't display M-rated games"...or anything else specific. From my reading, it adds "inappropriate violence" to their pornography statute. In other words, it's so vague that even Super Smash Brothers Melee could activate the new clause depending on how "appropriate" you find it for Link to shoot an arrow at Jigglypuff...
Compared to $100 for 20GB of space, it's all a friggin' joke. I'll never understand how people can spin memory cards (especially Sony's format) into a good thing - or even an "average" thing - for a game console when the Xbox demonstrated how great it is to have a hard drive (BTW- Microsoft's decision to release a version of the 360 with no hard drive was similarly boneheaded).
I'm not against Sony generally but on the memory card issue I think they're completely out to lunch. This is particularly true considering their (read: Kutaragi's) assertion that videogames are only a small facet of what the PS3 is going to provide to the consumer.
At least Nintendo charged so little for the Gamecube that you could pick up a console, memory card and game, and still be paying less for those items together than for a PS2 by itself...
Y'all should have said "Yes, sir. Absolutely. You'll receive your EM-less cell phone in a couple days." Then, remove the guts from an old cell phone, throw it in a box and send it on over. He'd probably use it to have even more interesting conversations than when he had a real one.
Funny. That web site comes up just fine in Firefox. Shouldn't anyone browsing the Interweb at this stage expect that many sites require Flash and use one of the many browsers (in Windows, OSX and Linux) that supports it? Either that, or not whine like a child when you choose not to subject yourself to something you don't want?
What you describe would certainly be my expectation. It's just concerning when I read about Blu-Ray players debuting at $1,000 while HD-DVD players will [supposedly] be at $500, and when there's this much talk about the expense of the PS3 it increases that concern. And when Blu-Ray is explained as a big change from DVDs while HD-DVDs are billed as an evolution...Anyway, since I don't know the details of manufacturing, all I have are the questions.
Thanks, by the way, for mentioning that fact about DVD players versus the PS2. People repeat so often that the PS2 was cheaper than standalone DVD players when it came out that it's become accepted as the truth. The real truth is that by the time the PS2 came out in the US I had already owned two DVD players and I got both (one Zenith and one Panasonic) for less than $300. In fact, that Christmas I gave [Toshiba] DVD players to several people, each of which I bought for less than $200 - $170 per unit if I recall correctly.
The bottom line is that if the manufacturing costs for Blu-Ray players have been exaggerated, then my question is moot. I don't have a horse in the race except that I'll buy whichever format has the right titles and sells for the right price (standalone player at $250 or less). Oh and, yes, the PS2 was an awful DVD player out of the box.:)
This will be my last word in this subject. I'm not arguing that it's not expensive to make brand new technology. What I'm saying (from the beginning) is that if, say, Samsung can't make and sell a Blu-Ray player at a price equal to, or less than, the price of the PS3 (with Blu-Ray playback) because Sony is willing to take a huge loss on their hardware, then Samsung (or any other Blu-Ray manufacturer) should be pissed off. Why? Because at that point Sony would be getting a whole bunch of sales for which the other manufacturers simply can't compete because a) they have to make a profit on the hardware and b) they can't throw a game system into their units.
Honest to God, if you can't follow this line of reasoning then there's nothing to help you...
But will there be ANY Blu-Ray players costing less than the PS3? You see, you're so intent on demonstrating your point that there's a high-end electronics market (something of which I'm well aware) that you're ignoring my fundamental point which is that if it is NOT POSSIBLE to make and sell a Blu-Ray player for less than the cost of the PS3 then the manufacturers who would normally specialize in lower cost hardware (like, for example, Samsung) have little or no incentive to manufacture Blu-Ray devices. This becomes particularly important if, as I said before, HD-DVD players are at a price point less than half of that of any other non-PS3 Blu-Ray device.
Finally, on content, I would note that content providers will jump ship on Blu-Ray rapidement if the only affordable Blu-Ray device is the PS3. Just because they've announced support for Blu-Ray doesn't mean that they're locked into the format forever. After all, they (apart from Sony and its movie subsidiaries) don't have any good reason to lock themselves in to one format.
So, to summarize:
1. YES, I KNOW THAT THERE IS AN ENTUSIAST MARKET THAT WILL PAY A PREMIUM FOR HIGH-END ELECTRONICS.
2. The entusiast market doesn't drive mass-market acceptance of new devices; all it does is defray the costs of R&D. If it did drive the mass market, then the LaserDisc would have been a lot more popular than it was. What drives such acceptance is a reasonable price for something desirable. In other words, the whole phenomenon (whether HD-DVD, Blu-Ray or both) doesn't mean a damn thing until the hardware is $200 or less.
3. Content providers have no built-in incentive to let their content sit on shelves unbought, which is what will happen if Blu-Ray devices stay high-priced.
4. Non-gamers aren't going to buy PS3s just for Blu-Ray if HD-DVD alternatives are cheaper. Even enthusiasts will take a deal if they can get one...
I think you're making a pretty wild assumption that only people with high-end tastes are buying HDTVs and would want Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD. The truth is that you can get a 27" HDTV-ready TV that would see a visual improvent from high-definition discs over DVD for under $500 ("name brand" like Samsung even). Only a hundred dollars more and you can step up to a widescreen version. You can even pick up an LCD HDTV-ready display for under $1,000. I've seen more expensive televisions in living rooms where people were actually using the TV's speakers!
Besides, the high-end electronics you're describing are never sold at a loss - after all, those companies aren't getting a cut of every movie/game released on a particular format. Again, if Sony uses Blu-Ray licensing fees paid by hardware manufacturers to subsidize their own device being sold at a loss then those other Blu-Ray manufacturers are getting hosed, funding their competitor in an incredibly unfair fashion.
That's all assuming that another company can't manufacture and sell a Blu-Ray player cheaper than a PS3 and, again, I don't know the details. If they can, then everything's fine. If they can't then they're just not going to be able to stay in the Blu-Ray game.
I can say one thing with absolute certainty, though: If HD-DVD players end up at half the cost of Blu-Ray players, then Blu-Ray (as a medium for mass-market movies a la DVD) is doomed in any case. Content providers will run, not walk, away from Blu-Ray because movie-buying consumers simply won't care if one format can hold 20% more data than the other when they can get the 80% at half the price.
Here's something I've been wondering about: At CES, all the talk about Blu-Ray referred to a price point of around $1,000 at launch for standalone players. If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $500 and it includes fully functioning Blu-Ray movie playback, wouldn't that really piss off their hardware partners? In fact, if the above is true (and I honestly don't have the slightest idea), I wouldn't be surprised if Blu-Ray manufacturers abandoned the format and went for HD-DVD instead (with units projected to launch at $500). That could really put in a crimp in the assumptions that Blu-Ray will a) be the dominant high-definition disc format and b) make Sony a ton of money to make up for whatever losses they take on PS3 hardware.
Heaven forbid your neighbor might actually knock on the door and wait for permission to enter.
My neighbors could be my best friends and I still wouldn't want them wandering in and out of my house at will - something strongly encouraged by a wide-open door.
That fine print is a formality, like a talk show saying how bad it is when someone gets killed but still includes the "these opinions are not necessarily those of..." disclaimer. When analysts issue reports like this they have to do so on a "good faith" basis. If they're approached by regulators (like, say, the SEC) they have to be ready to defend their opinion. If they can't, they could be subject to severe penalties, up to and including jail time (Club Fed, but it's still jail).
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the analysis is correct. I certainly don't have enough information or expertise to make that judgement. But, they can't just pull things like this straight out of their ass and toss it up for public view. They have to rub it on some facts first...
Sure, they have other revenue streams but when put together they all have to have a margin, and a consumer market, that can at least recoup the costs of research, development, production, marketing...
In other words, let's say that they lose $400 per PS3 sold (that would be stunning to me, but I'll go with it) intending to make up the difference through game sales. Now the game sales (talking first-party here) have to not only recoup their own costs but they have to cover the losses from the console itself. It's even worse for Blu-Ray licensing since their per-unit licensing fees have to be large enough for Sony to make up for their research and development on Blu-Ray (it would be an instant profit out of the gate) and small enough so that the format is attractive to manufacturers and content providers.
In short, if this analysis is accurate (and I have my doubts until Sony makes a reporting of their actual costs after producing and distributing the consoles) then Sony is up a creek without a paddle. They've already been laying off employees and experiencing profit problems in other divisions. If the Playstation division joins in, we could see a company-destroying debacle. Again, though, whether or not this analysis is truly accurate would be the big "if."
Probably because for many of us, swearing is acceptable up to a point and then becomes offensive and therefore annoying. I swear at times (as evidenced in some of my previous posts here and elsewhere) both online and off. What I don't do is constantly swear, especially around people I don't know. Hell, I still censor myself around my parents as a sign of respect (though they can both sound like drill sergeants/sailors when they feel like it).
Maybe it is an American thing...Since I haven't traveled to, and lived in, other countries I couldn't say. Regardless, it seems so easy to just not inflict the cussing on random strangers who might not appreciate it. Being polite isn't a vice...
The last EB I went to, they only had about 1/6th of the store dedicated to PC gaming.
Wouldn't a fraction like that make sense in any case? EB, right now, is going to stock games for Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, Gamecube, GBA, DS and PSP - at a minimum. Most also have some space set aside for DVD movies. If PC games are getting a sixth, or even an eighth, of the shelf space - especially considering the vast number of people who own PS2s and GBAs - then they're probably doing all right...
It's not just the repeated viewing factor. It's also the fact that comedies tend to work just as well on a small screen as they do on a bigger one. Action movies tend to be "spectacles" which lose a lot of their impact as the screen gets smaller and smaller.
There are points in all the GTA games, they just go by the name "dollars" instead. They may have used the wrong term but at least as regards the killing of hookers - which does accrue dollars/points - it's only a difference of semantics. Now, on the issue of "rape," you're exactly right since you can't "force" the woman to get in the car and bounce it around with you.
First, as another poster has already mentioned, there is already a GBA cartridge designed specifically for the DS that will do nothing in a GBA: The Metroid Prime Pinball rumble pack.
Second, And, as a previous GBA owner, I personally have more GBA games, and end up switching out DS games LESS then GBA games, so, at least for me (and many others, seeing as that a large percentage of DS owners had a GBA first), it's more convenient.
You have more games for a system that has been available for over four years than for a system that's been out for 15 months? Color me stunned!
The DS is getting game releases at a very healthy clip, and the rate is only increasing. First-party games alone could tie up a DS gamer up for a long time (a very long time considering the open-ended nature of DS games/toys like Animal Crossing, Nintendogs and Electroplankton).
That said, you're probably right about Nintendo and others avoiding putting DS products primarily on GBA cartridges. But that's certainly not out of consideration for GBA owners. After all, what GBA owner is going to hear that a DS product (game/expansion/whatever) is on a GBA cartridge, then see the box in the store that says "DS" all over it (note that said boxes are not made out of a clear material so that one could see a GBA-style cartridge as opposed to a DS-specific card), and still buy the thing without having a DS?
Plaintiff's attorney: Your honor, my client bought this cartridge that looked like it would work in his Game Boy Advance but it didn't. Nintendo's attorney: Your honor, we put "DS" on the box in big letters and there was no way to see that it was a GBA-type cartridge before purchase. Judge: Plaintiff, you're stupid and your lawyer is stupid. Case dismissed. Plaintiff to pay court costs, plaintiff's attorney to be reported to the bar for filing a baseless lawsuit.
The AC might have been abrupt, but considering the question you asked could have been answered in about one to two minutes of Google work - the second link in a search on "nintendo wifi" is Nintendo's own site which would have given you all the information you need - I think it's understandable that someone would jump on you a bit...
It was for the GBA, a combo cartridge with Dr. Mario and Puzzle League (which, apparently, is the same as Tetris Attack). I picked it up for my mom a couple weeks ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, come on. You seem to be proceeding on the assumptions that a) a significant percentage of the owners of the other two consoles didn't have Xbox as well and b) the console market is the same as it was in 2001 (it's not).
Halo 2 was one of the biggest videogame releases ever, and a huge percentage of the people who bought and loved Halo 2 still don't have an Xbox 360. Thus, a large number of those people will have increased interest in the Xbox 360 when Halo 3 is released, and I'm sure many of those folks will have to choose between Xbox 360 and PS3 - a choice in which available games (particularly one which they've been anticipating) will play an important part.
Again, I'm not a big Halo fan myself (just not that into FPS games anymore). But the idea that the first two games haven't generated a huge fanbase - a fanbase that will want to play the third game ASAP - is without merit.
Further, if we're going to use history as a guide, the PS2 launch lineup sucked hard. If the PS3 doesn't have a strong batch of games, the launch could really turn sour with the 360 getting its year-two lineup (not to mention the fact that there will be many 360s in stock by then while the PS3 could end up being another hard-to-find console at launch)...
You're right to the extent that you've successfully restated what has actually been said. Where I think you go a bit wonky is in your implication that the delay in Japan means nothing in terms of the US launch. If they can't get the PS3 released in Japan before fall/winter that means they would have less leeway to produce sufficient stock for a US launch this year. In other words, Sony would end up in the same situation as Microsoft with the Xbox 360, launching the system in multiple markets without enough hardware to satisfy demand.
So, while no delay has been announced for the US launch one can reasonably infer that even if some US PS3s are shipped, Sony will not be able to ship as many as they would have if they had been able to make their planned spring launch in Japan. It could technically be considered no delay if each US store gets one to five PS3s to sell before December 31st, but it really is a delay since most of the people who would want them won't be able to get them.
GP's post was poorly constructed, but I believe he meant that a Halo 3 launch at the time of the release of PS3 is possible again now that the PS3 has been officially delayed. Thus, the Halo 3 launch would again be a threat to Sony.
Since I'm not a big Halo fan (though I liked the Xbox), I can't say that it would be a big deal to me. But, if Halo 3 "rocks" and brings a big new audience to the 360, that would indeed be bad for Sony. Worse for them would be if MS could find away to drop the price of the 360 in time for the PS3 launch - now that would certainly decrease demand for the Sony console. Of course, if Sony doesn't have the supply to meet the demand anyway they'll be able to, like Microsoft, declare success no matter how well the 360 is doing at the time...
Think about it though: shipping with Linux might just create a vector for undermining the DRM on the Blu-Ray HD movies playable on this console.
That vector will already be in place when BR and HD-DVD drives are available to stick into a PC - something which could very well happen before the PS3 hits the US market, and almost certainly before PS3 supply is able to meet PS3 demand.
Nice link! I mean, damn, in that previous comment you basically say "I don't think it will cost that much" and then proceed to explain why using no concrete examples, no information about actual costs of the new hardware (just a few WAGs about costs of current hardware) and, best of all, no links to any solid information...and you managed to turn that into another "informative" point of karma. Well done!
Are you teasing the next big THX logo/clip/bit?
Here's the problem: As far as I've been able to find out, the law does not say anything as specific as "you can't sell games rated 'M' by the ESRB to minors" or "you can't display M-rated games"...or anything else specific. From my reading, it adds "inappropriate violence" to their pornography statute. In other words, it's so vague that even Super Smash Brothers Melee could activate the new clause depending on how "appropriate" you find it for Link to shoot an arrow at Jigglypuff...
Compared to $100 for 20GB of space, it's all a friggin' joke. I'll never understand how people can spin memory cards (especially Sony's format) into a good thing - or even an "average" thing - for a game console when the Xbox demonstrated how great it is to have a hard drive (BTW- Microsoft's decision to release a version of the 360 with no hard drive was similarly boneheaded).
I'm not against Sony generally but on the memory card issue I think they're completely out to lunch. This is particularly true considering their (read: Kutaragi's) assertion that videogames are only a small facet of what the PS3 is going to provide to the consumer.
At least Nintendo charged so little for the Gamecube that you could pick up a console, memory card and game, and still be paying less for those items together than for a PS2 by itself...
Y'all should have said "Yes, sir. Absolutely. You'll receive your EM-less cell phone in a couple days." Then, remove the guts from an old cell phone, throw it in a box and send it on over. He'd probably use it to have even more interesting conversations than when he had a real one.
Funny. That web site comes up just fine in Firefox. Shouldn't anyone browsing the Interweb at this stage expect that many sites require Flash and use one of the many browsers (in Windows, OSX and Linux) that supports it? Either that, or not whine like a child when you choose not to subject yourself to something you don't want?
What you describe would certainly be my expectation. It's just concerning when I read about Blu-Ray players debuting at $1,000 while HD-DVD players will [supposedly] be at $500, and when there's this much talk about the expense of the PS3 it increases that concern. And when Blu-Ray is explained as a big change from DVDs while HD-DVDs are billed as an evolution...Anyway, since I don't know the details of manufacturing, all I have are the questions.
:)
Thanks, by the way, for mentioning that fact about DVD players versus the PS2. People repeat so often that the PS2 was cheaper than standalone DVD players when it came out that it's become accepted as the truth. The real truth is that by the time the PS2 came out in the US I had already owned two DVD players and I got both (one Zenith and one Panasonic) for less than $300. In fact, that Christmas I gave [Toshiba] DVD players to several people, each of which I bought for less than $200 - $170 per unit if I recall correctly.
The bottom line is that if the manufacturing costs for Blu-Ray players have been exaggerated, then my question is moot. I don't have a horse in the race except that I'll buy whichever format has the right titles and sells for the right price (standalone player at $250 or less). Oh and, yes, the PS2 was an awful DVD player out of the box.
This will be my last word in this subject. I'm not arguing that it's not expensive to make brand new technology. What I'm saying (from the beginning) is that if, say, Samsung can't make and sell a Blu-Ray player at a price equal to, or less than, the price of the PS3 (with Blu-Ray playback) because Sony is willing to take a huge loss on their hardware, then Samsung (or any other Blu-Ray manufacturer) should be pissed off. Why? Because at that point Sony would be getting a whole bunch of sales for which the other manufacturers simply can't compete because a) they have to make a profit on the hardware and b) they can't throw a game system into their units.
Honest to God, if you can't follow this line of reasoning then there's nothing to help you...
But will there be ANY Blu-Ray players costing less than the PS3? You see, you're so intent on demonstrating your point that there's a high-end electronics market (something of which I'm well aware) that you're ignoring my fundamental point which is that if it is NOT POSSIBLE to make and sell a Blu-Ray player for less than the cost of the PS3 then the manufacturers who would normally specialize in lower cost hardware (like, for example, Samsung) have little or no incentive to manufacture Blu-Ray devices. This becomes particularly important if, as I said before, HD-DVD players are at a price point less than half of that of any other non-PS3 Blu-Ray device.
Finally, on content, I would note that content providers will jump ship on Blu-Ray rapidement if the only affordable Blu-Ray device is the PS3. Just because they've announced support for Blu-Ray doesn't mean that they're locked into the format forever. After all, they (apart from Sony and its movie subsidiaries) don't have any good reason to lock themselves in to one format.
So, to summarize:
1. YES, I KNOW THAT THERE IS AN ENTUSIAST MARKET THAT WILL PAY A PREMIUM FOR HIGH-END ELECTRONICS.
2. The entusiast market doesn't drive mass-market acceptance of new devices; all it does is defray the costs of R&D. If it did drive the mass market, then the LaserDisc would have been a lot more popular than it was. What drives such acceptance is a reasonable price for something desirable. In other words, the whole phenomenon (whether HD-DVD, Blu-Ray or both) doesn't mean a damn thing until the hardware is $200 or less.
3. Content providers have no built-in incentive to let their content sit on shelves unbought, which is what will happen if Blu-Ray devices stay high-priced.
4. Non-gamers aren't going to buy PS3s just for Blu-Ray if HD-DVD alternatives are cheaper. Even enthusiasts will take a deal if they can get one...
I think you're making a pretty wild assumption that only people with high-end tastes are buying HDTVs and would want Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD. The truth is that you can get a 27" HDTV-ready TV that would see a visual improvent from high-definition discs over DVD for under $500 ("name brand" like Samsung even). Only a hundred dollars more and you can step up to a widescreen version. You can even pick up an LCD HDTV-ready display for under $1,000. I've seen more expensive televisions in living rooms where people were actually using the TV's speakers!
Besides, the high-end electronics you're describing are never sold at a loss - after all, those companies aren't getting a cut of every movie/game released on a particular format. Again, if Sony uses Blu-Ray licensing fees paid by hardware manufacturers to subsidize their own device being sold at a loss then those other Blu-Ray manufacturers are getting hosed, funding their competitor in an incredibly unfair fashion.
That's all assuming that another company can't manufacture and sell a Blu-Ray player cheaper than a PS3 and, again, I don't know the details. If they can, then everything's fine. If they can't then they're just not going to be able to stay in the Blu-Ray game.
I can say one thing with absolute certainty, though: If HD-DVD players end up at half the cost of Blu-Ray players, then Blu-Ray (as a medium for mass-market movies a la DVD) is doomed in any case. Content providers will run, not walk, away from Blu-Ray because movie-buying consumers simply won't care if one format can hold 20% more data than the other when they can get the 80% at half the price.
Here's something I've been wondering about: At CES, all the talk about Blu-Ray referred to a price point of around $1,000 at launch for standalone players. If Sony releases the PS3 for less than $500 and it includes fully functioning Blu-Ray movie playback, wouldn't that really piss off their hardware partners? In fact, if the above is true (and I honestly don't have the slightest idea), I wouldn't be surprised if Blu-Ray manufacturers abandoned the format and went for HD-DVD instead (with units projected to launch at $500). That could really put in a crimp in the assumptions that Blu-Ray will a) be the dominant high-definition disc format and b) make Sony a ton of money to make up for whatever losses they take on PS3 hardware.
Heaven forbid your neighbor might actually knock on the door and wait for permission to enter.
My neighbors could be my best friends and I still wouldn't want them wandering in and out of my house at will - something strongly encouraged by a wide-open door.
That fine print is a formality, like a talk show saying how bad it is when someone gets killed but still includes the "these opinions are not necessarily those of..." disclaimer. When analysts issue reports like this they have to do so on a "good faith" basis. If they're approached by regulators (like, say, the SEC) they have to be ready to defend their opinion. If they can't, they could be subject to severe penalties, up to and including jail time (Club Fed, but it's still jail).
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the analysis is correct. I certainly don't have enough information or expertise to make that judgement. But, they can't just pull things like this straight out of their ass and toss it up for public view. They have to rub it on some facts first...
In other words, let's say that they lose $400 per PS3 sold (that would be stunning to me, but I'll go with it) intending to make up the difference through game sales. Now the game sales (talking first-party here) have to not only recoup their own costs but they have to cover the losses from the console itself. It's even worse for Blu-Ray licensing since their per-unit licensing fees have to be large enough for Sony to make up for their research and development on Blu-Ray (it would be an instant profit out of the gate) and small enough so that the format is attractive to manufacturers and content providers.
In short, if this analysis is accurate (and I have my doubts until Sony makes a reporting of their actual costs after producing and distributing the consoles) then Sony is up a creek without a paddle. They've already been laying off employees and experiencing profit problems in other divisions. If the Playstation division joins in, we could see a company-destroying debacle. Again, though, whether or not this analysis is truly accurate would be the big "if."
Probably because for many of us, swearing is acceptable up to a point and then becomes offensive and therefore annoying. I swear at times (as evidenced in some of my previous posts here and elsewhere) both online and off. What I don't do is constantly swear, especially around people I don't know. Hell, I still censor myself around my parents as a sign of respect (though they can both sound like drill sergeants/sailors when they feel like it).
Maybe it is an American thing...Since I haven't traveled to, and lived in, other countries I couldn't say. Regardless, it seems so easy to just not inflict the cussing on random strangers who might not appreciate it. Being polite isn't a vice...
The last EB I went to, they only had about 1/6th of the store dedicated to PC gaming.
Wouldn't a fraction like that make sense in any case? EB, right now, is going to stock games for Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, Gamecube, GBA, DS and PSP - at a minimum. Most also have some space set aside for DVD movies. If PC games are getting a sixth, or even an eighth, of the shelf space - especially considering the vast number of people who own PS2s and GBAs - then they're probably doing all right...
It's not just the repeated viewing factor. It's also the fact that comedies tend to work just as well on a small screen as they do on a bigger one. Action movies tend to be "spectacles" which lose a lot of their impact as the screen gets smaller and smaller.
There are points in all the GTA games, they just go by the name "dollars" instead. They may have used the wrong term but at least as regards the killing of hookers - which does accrue dollars/points - it's only a difference of semantics. Now, on the issue of "rape," you're exactly right since you can't "force" the woman to get in the car and bounce it around with you.
First, as another poster has already mentioned, there is already a GBA cartridge designed specifically for the DS that will do nothing in a GBA: The Metroid Prime Pinball rumble pack.
Second,
And, as a previous GBA owner, I personally have more GBA games, and end up switching out DS games LESS then GBA games, so, at least for me (and many others, seeing as that a large percentage of DS owners had a GBA first), it's more convenient.
You have more games for a system that has been available for over four years than for a system that's been out for 15 months? Color me stunned!
The DS is getting game releases at a very healthy clip, and the rate is only increasing. First-party games alone could tie up a DS gamer up for a long time (a very long time considering the open-ended nature of DS games/toys like Animal Crossing, Nintendogs and Electroplankton).
That said, you're probably right about Nintendo and others avoiding putting DS products primarily on GBA cartridges. But that's certainly not out of consideration for GBA owners. After all, what GBA owner is going to hear that a DS product (game/expansion/whatever) is on a GBA cartridge, then see the box in the store that says "DS" all over it (note that said boxes are not made out of a clear material so that one could see a GBA-style cartridge as opposed to a DS-specific card), and still buy the thing without having a DS?
Plaintiff's attorney: Your honor, my client bought this cartridge that looked like it would work in his Game Boy Advance but it didn't.
Nintendo's attorney: Your honor, we put "DS" on the box in big letters and there was no way to see that it was a GBA-type cartridge before purchase.
Judge: Plaintiff, you're stupid and your lawyer is stupid. Case dismissed. Plaintiff to pay court costs, plaintiff's attorney to be reported to the bar for filing a baseless lawsuit.
The AC might have been abrupt, but considering the question you asked could have been answered in about one to two minutes of Google work - the second link in a search on "nintendo wifi" is Nintendo's own site which would have given you all the information you need - I think it's understandable that someone would jump on you a bit...
It was for the GBA, a combo cartridge with Dr. Mario and Puzzle League (which, apparently, is the same as Tetris Attack). I picked it up for my mom a couple weeks ago.