Okay, I'll bite.
1) The article was *about* San Andreas. It wasn't just using San Andreas to back up a statement, it was making a comment about the importance of this particular game and the mainstream public reaction to it.
2) GamesIndustry.biz is a UK publication. The media industries here are actually a pretty good microcosm for the world at large, but that's not the point really - GI's audience is largely UK-based, and our staff (er, me. and the other guy.) are in the UK. It's worth pointing this out since I actually get criticised fairly often for using UK specific data by people who assume I'm in California (god forbid!)...
Basically, at the time they felt poor sales of the GCN were related to PS2 hitting the market ahead of the GCN and having a much larger base of games to compete with.
Interestingly, this is still Microsoft's take - they seem to genuinely think that if they'd launched Xbox ahead of PS2, they would have beaten Sony in the last generation.
Nintendo clearly used to think that way, but their top management seem to have had a major change of mind about how to do business in the last couple of years. They're more interested in creating a product that stands apart from the competition as interesting and innovative than in creating a me-too console without much to distinguish it from Xbox 2 and PS3 - because they know that doing that is a recipe for being crushed by Sony.
Nintendo continues to exist in the home console space because they offer a very different type of gaming experience on their platform to that which is offered by PS2 and Xbox. They need to build on that advantage, not pointlessly fight with Microsoft over second place. End of the day, most Xbox owners wouldn't touch a Cube with a barge pole, and vice versa, so it's not like the two are even in direct competition, really.
Ack - it's bad enough that we've got some horrible little warez site stealing our content, but it kinda adds insult to injury when that then proceeds to be Slashdotted...!
By the way, we're expecting to see a price point on the PSP in the first week of October. Nintendo kinda caught Sony on the hop with the pre-TGS announcement; everyone expected them to hold off on saying anything about DS until their conference on October 7th.
Looks like the 33,000 Yen price is on the money though, which will make the PSP twice the price of the DS. I think it's interesting how at E3 this year everyone was incredibly psyched about PSP and didn't give a shit whether it'd be more expensive than DS or not; indeed, everyone figured that PSP was Nintendo's death knell.
In the space of six months, public opinion (or at least, industry opinion) has about-faced and PSP now has a hell of a lot to prove, while DS looks better by the minute.
Personally, I think it's great that this is actually looking like a two-horse race now. Nintendo suddenly got fire in their bellies when it looked like the Game Boy's dominance of the handheld market was going to be broken. If they bring that same fire, and aggressive stance, into the next home console generation as well, things are going to get very interesting indeed.
Yeah, "torrid" is used in the sense of "unpleasant, arid, too bloody hot and dry". A bit British, I know, but since the English invented the language I think they should have first rights on messing around with it too;)
I don't get the problem with the use of "real-time", though. It implies the distinction between something which was on show using real, live game code, and something which was demonstrated only using pre-rendered footage - be it in-game footage or footage not possible in game (touched up or externally rendered).
Oh, and er, no - it doesn't imply that I write previews based on watching others play, but cheers for your cynicism all the same. Honestly, I thought it was us tired old hacks who were meant to be embittered and cynical, not the readers!:)
""A lithium-ion battery rather than awkward AA batteries (like the GBA SP) ".. all GBA SPs use LiIon, rather than AAs."
Yes, which is what that sentence says, albeit with rather clunky phrasing. Sorry about that, got chewed up by a subeditor.
I'm also terribly sorry that you were upset by the lack of a picture of an N-Gage. Had you forgotten what they look like?:)
Regarding your ACTUAL criticisms of the article as opposed to your attempts to score schoolboy debating points...
I don't think I glossed over details of how difficult the PS3 will be to code. However, comparing it with the Jaguar and Saturn is unfair; they both came from an era where games were generally never written multi-threaded and where middleware was extremely rarely used. As it stands, writing a multiprocessor game for PS3 will probably be easier than performing the delicate balancing act between the EE, VU0, VU1, the GS and the IOP in the PS2. The Xbox2 will inevitably still be a far easier platform to develop for though.
You're obviously confused about the point I'm making in the final paragraph. I'm not TRYING to decide whether first mover advantage is real or not - I'm pointing out that this is a decision which needs to be made by Microsoft, and that it's a difficult one, and presenting some of the arguments on both sides. I'm trying to present analysis here, not act like the Oracle at Delphi with answers for all the questions. And no, I don't know next week's lottery numbers either!
I agree completely with you on the other issue by the way - competition is great for consumers, and it's good to see some genuinely serious competition to Sony. However, the fact is that in business terms, it's what Sony does next that we're all waiting to see - because they control the market right now, plain and simple. I get the impression that most of your criticisms are based on the fact that you believe I'm excessively "pro-Sony" - but I'm not trying to write a fanboy console war piece here, I'm trying to analyse Sony's business strategy. A task which, oddly enough, involves a lot of focus on Sony's products:)
Slashdot Mirror
It's called sarcasm. It happens in British journalism sometimes. Sorry :)
Okay, I'll bite. 1) The article was *about* San Andreas. It wasn't just using San Andreas to back up a statement, it was making a comment about the importance of this particular game and the mainstream public reaction to it. 2) GamesIndustry.biz is a UK publication. The media industries here are actually a pretty good microcosm for the world at large, but that's not the point really - GI's audience is largely UK-based, and our staff (er, me. and the other guy.) are in the UK. It's worth pointing this out since I actually get criticised fairly often for using UK specific data by people who assume I'm in California (god forbid!)...
Nintendo clearly used to think that way, but their top management seem to have had a major change of mind about how to do business in the last couple of years. They're more interested in creating a product that stands apart from the competition as interesting and innovative than in creating a me-too console without much to distinguish it from Xbox 2 and PS3 - because they know that doing that is a recipe for being crushed by Sony.
Nintendo continues to exist in the home console space because they offer a very different type of gaming experience on their platform to that which is offered by PS2 and Xbox. They need to build on that advantage, not pointlessly fight with Microsoft over second place. End of the day, most Xbox owners wouldn't touch a Cube with a barge pole, and vice versa, so it's not like the two are even in direct competition, really.
By the way, we're expecting to see a price point on the PSP in the first week of October. Nintendo kinda caught Sony on the hop with the pre-TGS announcement; everyone expected them to hold off on saying anything about DS until their conference on October 7th.
Looks like the 33,000 Yen price is on the money though, which will make the PSP twice the price of the DS. I think it's interesting how at E3 this year everyone was incredibly psyched about PSP and didn't give a shit whether it'd be more expensive than DS or not; indeed, everyone figured that PSP was Nintendo's death knell.
In the space of six months, public opinion (or at least, industry opinion) has about-faced and PSP now has a hell of a lot to prove, while DS looks better by the minute.
Personally, I think it's great that this is actually looking like a two-horse race now. Nintendo suddenly got fire in their bellies when it looked like the Game Boy's dominance of the handheld market was going to be broken. If they bring that same fire, and aggressive stance, into the next home console generation as well, things are going to get very interesting indeed.
Yeah, "torrid" is used in the sense of "unpleasant, arid, too bloody hot and dry". A bit British, I know, but since the English invented the language I think they should have first rights on messing around with it too ;)
I don't get the problem with the use of "real-time", though. It implies the distinction between something which was on show using real, live game code, and something which was demonstrated only using pre-rendered footage - be it in-game footage or footage not possible in game (touched up or externally rendered).
Oh, and er, no - it doesn't imply that I write previews based on watching others play, but cheers for your cynicism all the same. Honestly, I thought it was us tired old hacks who were meant to be embittered and cynical, not the readers! :)
""A lithium-ion battery rather than awkward AA batteries (like the GBA SP) " .. all GBA SPs use LiIon, rather than AAs."
:)
:)
Yes, which is what that sentence says, albeit with rather clunky phrasing. Sorry about that, got chewed up by a subeditor.
I'm also terribly sorry that you were upset by the lack of a picture of an N-Gage. Had you forgotten what they look like?
Regarding your ACTUAL criticisms of the article as opposed to your attempts to score schoolboy debating points...
I don't think I glossed over details of how difficult the PS3 will be to code. However, comparing it with the Jaguar and Saturn is unfair; they both came from an era where games were generally never written multi-threaded and where middleware was extremely rarely used. As it stands, writing a multiprocessor game for PS3 will probably be easier than performing the delicate balancing act between the EE, VU0, VU1, the GS and the IOP in the PS2. The Xbox2 will inevitably still be a far easier platform to develop for though.
You're obviously confused about the point I'm making in the final paragraph. I'm not TRYING to decide whether first mover advantage is real or not - I'm pointing out that this is a decision which needs to be made by Microsoft, and that it's a difficult one, and presenting some of the arguments on both sides. I'm trying to present analysis here, not act like the Oracle at Delphi with answers for all the questions. And no, I don't know next week's lottery numbers either!
I agree completely with you on the other issue by the way - competition is great for consumers, and it's good to see some genuinely serious competition to Sony. However, the fact is that in business terms, it's what Sony does next that we're all waiting to see - because they control the market right now, plain and simple. I get the impression that most of your criticisms are based on the fact that you believe I'm excessively "pro-Sony" - but I'm not trying to write a fanboy console war piece here, I'm trying to analyse Sony's business strategy. A task which, oddly enough, involves a lot of focus on Sony's products